My personal thoughts: Older generations are better & older games/remakes are better

[PokeAwesome94]

These are my personal thoughts:


The older the generation, the better:

Gen 1 - the best
Gen 2 - very good
Gen 3 - ok, took a while to fully accept them
Gen 4 - kinda ok, got used to it
Gen 5 - WTF: many look just plain stupid, others look like something a 5 year old would call "super cute" and some look like a rip-off of previous Pokémon or other characters, like Digimon. Pokémon based on vanilla ice cream, sarcophaguses and chandeliers? You got to be kidding me Game Freak, now you aren't even trying anymore.
Zekrom, Reshiram, Kyurem, Haxorus, Braviary, Dewott, Samurott, Druddigon, Bisharp and some others are good, but that's just a few.


The older the game or the game that a remake is based on, the better. (bold = games I own):

1. FireRed & LeafGreen - BEST. GAME. EVER. PLAYED.
2. HeartGold & SoulSilver - very good
3. Ruby, Sapphire & Emerald - good
4. Diamond, Pearl & Platium - good
5. Black & White - haven't played long, the game's ok, but not the majority of generation 5 Pokémon

 

[MiTjA]

Where is the "they're all as good as any other" option?

Gen 5 INTENTIONALLY tried to pay homage to the original 150, meaning they used many of the same basic concepts and did something new with them.

Of course the right side is the weird one while the left one is the best. :I

I suggest you take a good look at the older gens again.
Without nostalgia glasses on.

You might notice that they >look just plain stupid,

others look like something a 5 year old would call "super cute"

and some look like a rip-off of previous Pokémon or other characters

, like Digimon

.
Pokémon based on vanilla ice cream

, sarcophaguses

and chandeliers

?
You got to be kidding me Game Freak, now you aren't even trying anymore.

<


In other words:
There have always been funny looking pokemon, even based on cliches and puns,
There have always been cute looking pokemon,
There have always been pokemon that look like pokemon,
"They look like digimon" is a meaningless statement unless you give any definitions, but even then you would have to be very careful so it affects gen 5 but not gen 1,
There have always been pokemon that resemble inanimate objects, which could be called reverse mimicry,
gamefreak are doing a good job, I cannot wait to see more quality designs.

Stating an observation does not make a creature design bad unless you actually explain why it makes it bad.

I'll sum up your post with this graph:

y-How good a generation is
x-Time passed since introduction in years

 

[PokeAwesome94]

I'm talking about the amount of stupid-looking Pokémon, "super cute" Pokémon and rip-offs in generation 5. The other generations had a good balance.

I haven't considered the Kanto Pokémon you listed as rip-offs even if they share the same body structure. I don't think that Blastoise and Kabutops are rip-offs of each other as the only thing I can think off that they have in common is that they are water type Pokémon who have shells and similar-looking sharp claws at their feet.

Diglett and Excadrill are both mole Pokémon, but they they don't look like each other, so I don't consider that a rip-off. That would be like saying that Groundon is a rip-off of Tyranitar because they are booth based on a predator dinosaur.

The ripoffs I was thinking off was:

Oshawott= Piplup + Bidoof
Pidove = Starly (Yes, I know that there's a bird Pokémon at the start of every game and that they all share some similarities, but this is just ridiculous)
Woobat = Golbat
Lilligant = Bellosom (If you didn't know anything about Lilligant and told you that it's an evolved form of Gloom you'd probably fall for it)

The only generation 5 Pokémon I didn't hate that you mentioned was Excadrill and Zebstrika. Trubbish look like something from Lilo & Stich.

Nice graph, I fully agree with it.



My opinions on the development of the generations:


vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=261 - How much is a legendary Pokémon worth if there are 13 of them in that generation?

collegehumor.com/video/6042492/pokemon-gotta-buy-em-all

 

[Oryx]

Anyone who has any basic knowledge of video games is aware that the newer games far surpass the older games from an objective standpoint. However, there are some noticeable differences in overall design of the Pokemon which can make some people like the older designs better. To each their own, designs are subjective.

 

[PokeAwesome94]

Anyone who has any basic knowledge of video games is aware that the newer games far surpass the older games from an objective standpoint. However, there are some noticeable differences in overall design of the Pokemon which can make some people like the older designs better. To each their own, designs are subjective.

Well, I like the regions, Pokémon and storylines in the earlier games more. Your "newer is better" rule doesn't apply to all video games. I have for example never heard anyone say that Far Cry 2 is better than Far Cry 1. As for Pokémon games it depends on what you're looking for in a game. If your looking for the best graphics, then of course the newer games are better suited for you, but if you have the same demands of a Pokémon game as I have the earlier games are a better choice. It's individual.

 

[MiTjA]

I was only relating to your rip-off comment with the Kanga/Nido/Rhydon pics. And Blastoise/Kabutops was random just to show that I can point to any old pokemon and say they look like digimon even though you haven't explained what you mean with that. Of course I personally don't think any pokemon looks like digimon, unless they both look like what they're based off obviously.

But anyway,
What's the deal with "rip-offs" and why does it matter?

Everything is a rip-off. There is nothing original. E=mc^2 & 1+1=2
You cannot make up something that never got into your head.
Meaning all pokemon are original rip-offs I guess.

Give any example of a stupid looking pokemon and I will point to a stupider one that preceeded it.

 

[Oryx]

Well, I like the regions, Pokémon and storylines in the earlier games more. Your "newer is better" rule doesn't apply to all video games. I have for example never heard anyone say that Far Cry 2 is better than Far Cry 1. As for Pokémon games it depends on what you're looking for in a game. If your looking for the best graphics, then of course the newer games are better suited for you, but if you have the same demands of a Pokémon game as I have the earlier games are a better choice. It's individual.

The 'newer is better' rule I mentioned was specifically referring to the Pokemon games. From an objective standpoint. What you're saying is "subjectively I like the older games better", which is fine. But from an objective standpoint, the graphics have improved, the audio has improved, the storylines have improved, the Pokemon have become more diverse, there are many features and sidequests, so from an objective standpoint the newer games are better.

Basically, saying "I like the older games better" is a subjective statement. Saying "The older games are better" is an objective statement, which is objectively wrong.

 

[PokeAwesome94]

Where is the "they're all as good as any other" option?

As far as I've understood almost all Pokémon fans have one or several favourite generations, so I didn't really think about that.

What's the deal with "rip-offs" and why does it matter?

Everything is a rip-off. There is nothing original. E=mc^2 & 1+1=2
You cannot make up something that never got into your head.
Meaning all pokemon are original rip-offs I guess.

I wouldn't care about the rip-offs if Game Freak would have done a good job instead of disgracing the Pokémon they ripped off. For example, Sesmitoad and Woobat digraces Poliwrath and Golbat.

And Blastoise/Kabutops was random just to show that I can point to any old pokemon and say they look like digimon even though you haven't explained what you mean with that. Of course I personally don't think any pokemon looks like digimon, unless they both look like what they're based off obviously.

I think that generation 5 reminds me of Digimon more than Pokémon and that's my personal opinion. If you don't like it then you shouldn't visit threads that start with "My personal thoughts" as this thread is my way to let off some steam because I'm angry at the rapidly decresing quality of the Pokemon generations.

What I've been referring to is a bird Digimon from Digimon Adventure (season 1). It was encountered on an abandoned cruise ship and looked like Archen and Archeops (if I remember correctly).

But it's going to take a while to find it since there are at least 1141 Digimon according to Digimon Wiki. That in combination with rediculously small thumbnails on Digimon Wiki makes it hard to find. I'm going to try to look through Digimon season 1 and see if I can find it there.

I did however find one Digimon that looked like a gen 5 Pokémon. Swanmon (digimon.wikia.com/wiki/Swanmon) looks like Swanna (bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Swanna_%28Pok%C3%A9mon%29).
I'm not going to make a big deal about it and I'm not using it as an argument since both look really similar to real Swan. I just wrote this in case somebody was interested.

Give any example of a stupid looking pokemon and I will point to a stupider one that preceeded it.

Well, luckily for me since you can't obviously use gen 5, I have unlimited access to "the fountain of stupidness". :P

 

[Atomic Pirate]

Anyone who has any basic knowledge of video games is aware that the newer games far surpass the older games from an objective standpoint. However, there are some noticeable differences in overall design of the Pokemon which can make some people like the older designs better. To each their own, designs are subjective.

Newer = Better? So, you're saying that Fallout: New Vegas is better than Fallout 3? Sorry, it's not. Fallout 3, the OLDER game, is much better than New Vegas, the NEWER game.

And I don't know about you, but I'd much rather play Pokemon Crystal than Black/White.

Anyway, my opinion on the generations (ranked out of 10) is:

1: 9/10
2: 10/10
3: 7/10
4: 3/10
5: 5/10

Give any example of a stupid looking pokemon and I will point to a stupider one that preceeded it.

Here. I DARE YOU to find something worse than this piece of trash.

 

[Xander Olivieri]

None of the Gen 5 Pokemon look like Digimon to me. I play and like both games and anime series evenly. I mean if you wanna claim that all of Gen 5 is Digimonesque, then all Pokemon are digimonesque because there are slight design upgrades through each generation.

Gyarados would make a pretty decent Digimon, its got the complexity of an Ultimate Level in its design.

I still say people who still claim that Pokemon look like digimon do not know anything about either franchise. Cause guess what. It was made by Gamefreak so they look like Pokemon since Gamefreak created Pokemon. No amount of whining will change that fact.

I like Generation 5. It was a refreshing change from what we were used to in a Pokemon game. I like the design and concepts of many of the Pokemon in Generation 5. I've been with the games since Generation 1. I actually turned 10 when the games were released and started from then so Pokemon has been a part of my life for more than half my life.

The only thing I've disliked about Pokemon's advances is that they got rid of two features I loved, the Secret Bases and Pokemon Contests.

 

[Oryx]

Newer = Better? So, you're saying that Fallout: New Vegas is better than Fallout 3? Sorry, it's not. Fallout 3, the OLDER game, is much better than New Vegas, the NEWER game.

Sigh. Reading comprehension, please people. I already addressed this in a separate post that you ignored:

The 'newer is better' rule I mentioned was specifically referring to the Pokemon games. From an objective standpoint.

And I don't know about you, but I'd much rather play Pokemon Crystal than Black/White.

Yes, and this is why "I like X generation better than Y generation" is a valid statement. Doesn't mean that that generation is better, as like I said in the post you ignored, that's a mostly objective statement (there is a little bit of wiggle room when two games are similar to each other, but no Pokemon games have been similar enough to warrant that wiggle room) that has an objective answer.

 

[T!M]

I adore the newer generation from RSE and up. They fix a majority of the problems that seem to make heavy occurrences in past installations.

RBY - Super Broken
GSC - 10x Less broken.
Everything beyond that; Beautiful.

 

[Sydian]

Keep it civil, guys. I hate these kinda of threads honestly because they always end up the same. One wrong move and this will be locked.

Btw, in response to the "super cute" Pokemon thing, there are Pokemon that are cute in EVERY generation. Eevee, Jumpluff, Wynaut, Happiny, Petilil...a cutie in each gen. So that argument is totally invalid. I'll come back to this when I'm not on a phone.

 

[Kenshin5]

Keep it civil, guys. I hate these kinda of threads honestly because they always end up the same. One wrong move and this will be locked.

Btw, in response to the "super cute" Pokemon thing, there are Pokemon that are cute in EVERY generation. Eevee, Jumpluff, Wynaut, Happiny, Petilil...a cutie in each gen. So that argument is totally invalid. I'll come back to this when I'm not on a phone.

Now you know how I feel when I see topics like this about Anime >_>.

I don't get the Digimon to Pokemon reference being valid either. Irrc Pokemon was created or official out in 96 whereas Digimon was out in 97. So to say something from the pokemon franchise is a copy of digimon is rather silly to me. Couldn't you just as easily go over to the Digimon franchise and say a Digimon has a resemblance to a pokemon? But no it has to be Pokemon franchise copying off Digimon intellectual ideas...

I never get this either. People will never be satified anyway you look at it, there are people that don't like that the pokemon are too outlandish and don't look anything like the previous pokemon they knew so they either call them Digimon or peg them as something entirely different cause they aren't used to it or if the design is something similar regardless if it is based on an entirely different bird species its to unoriginal or too similar. Otherwise if it isn't they are running out of ideas. It seems forgone that in animate objects will be created into pokemon so I don't see the issue there they have to work with new ideas and concepts since this isn't the start of the franchise and we don't have multiple concepts free to our disposal.

There is always going to be designs that you don't like and will like that happens every generation that doesn't mean that the entire generation should hinge on the fact you hate a few of its pokemon.

Seems more turned into a design topics rather than the additions that have actually be added through the generations and the remakes also include in the features of the current gen otherwise there wouldn't be much of a remake. I love the old games, but I also love the new things implemented through the years in Contests, Battle Frontier, Wifi Access, and so on.

 

[Clark]

The argument that the gen 5 Pokemon look "stupid" or "lazy" and the claim that the designers "weren't even trying" always perplexes me. If anything, many of the gen 5 designs seem... much more developed, thoughtful, and firmly-based than the designs in any generation prior. I mean I'll admit that initially I found many of them off-putting, and at first glance it does seem like a lot of weird monsters with all sorts of junk tacked onto them. But I think that's only because we tend to look at a fresh set of new Pokemon in comparison to the designs of earlier generations, which have for the most part been simplistic and down to earth. Gen 5 is much less organic, but that isn't necessarily bad. It's just unfamiliar.

But yeah, more to the point, I think, generally speaking, gen 5's Pokemon designs had a lot of thought put into them. Serperior's design draws direct inspiration from French royalty; the Reuniclus evolution line is based on the anatomy of a cell, right down to the cleavages, cytoplasm, and possibly even organelles. Several represent specific breeds or kinds of animal: Pidove is clearly a pigeon; Lillipup is clearly a Yorkshire Terrier (Pidgey is simply a "bird"; Growlithe is simply a "puppy"). Even the dreaded Garbodor has a complex and thoughtfully-developed design, with attention to color scheme and the placement of various parts and pieces (as compared to its predecessor, Muk, a rather unimaginative pile of purple sludge).

Don't misunderstand: I'm not saying earlier Pokemon designs are inferior or sloppy. Personally I adore every generation and every Pokemon design. They all have their own unique and lovable charm to them. I'm just saying gen 5's designs are a lot more inventive and developed than most people seem to give them credit for, especially when pitted against the likes of the first generation. The thing is, this shift from organic simplicity to spiffy complexity isn't a negative thing. It's a natural and necessary progressive change the series has taken as a means of staying fresh and constantly inventive. Each generation of Pokemon designs brings something new to the table, and even if it's difficult at times to let it sink in it's all still very much Pokemon.

 

[MiTjA]

@Elgyem:

It's literally a fresh take on

Again, I'm not saying I dislike Weezing. I don't as I don't dislike Vanilluxe.
They're both levitating weird creatures that gain faces and give off gas.
Note: Vanillite is not ice cream. It is a mineral based pokemon that likes to be covered with snow, but happens to look like ice cream. Which is creative and funny.
The only thing about it that I find weird is that it gains a second face.
But Dodrio,Dugtrio,Magneton,Koffing,Exeggcute make it seem quite a normal.

@iLike2EatPiez:
You explained it so professionally its unbelievable!

@Pokeawesome94:
I'm not sure you understood what the graph shows.
Because it says that majority of people dislike gen V now, gen VI has grown on them and they love everything before. In six years gen V will be good, but any new gen will be looked down upon as crap for no logical reason.

 

[Captain Fabio]

lol wow at this thread.

Anyway, I grew up with the original games and I prefer them, because they give me a nostalgia feeling and buzz that the new ones do not. They are good, but I will always have a place in my heart for the old set of games.​

​

 

[PokeAwesome94]

Note: Vanillite is not ice cream. It is a mineral based pokemon that likes to be covered with snow, but happens to look like ice cream.

Well, the name combined with it's apperance makes it kinda hard to not mistake it for a vanilla ice cream.

@Pokeawesome94:
I'm not sure you understood what the graph shows.
Because it says that majority of people dislike gen V now, gen VI has grown on them and they love everything before. In six years gen V will be good, but any new gen will be looked down upon as crap for no logical reason.

I'm really bad on math, so don't expect wonders from me.

 

[MiTjA]

Its intentional obviously.

 

[Atomic Pirate]

@Elgyem:

It's literally a fresh take on

Wait, you think Weezing is worse than Vanilluxe? I mean, sure, Weezing wasn't the most creative evolution of the 1st generation, but at least it looks cool. And sorry, no matter how much you argue about it, Vanilluxe IS based off of ice cream. And there is no need for an ice cream Pokemon.

I still say people who still claim that Pokemon look like digimon do not know anything about either franchise. Cause guess what. It was made by Gamefreak so they look like Pokemon since Gamefreak created Pokemon. No amount of whining will change that fact.

Digimon and newer Pokemon share many similarities. Both Digimon and newer Pokemon have unnecessary armor, pointless markings to "fill in empty space", and overcomplicated designs.

And sorry, but the older Pokemon games are better. Seriously, I don't know anyone, minus little kids, who'd rather play Diamond than Gold.