• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

3rd Gen Who here doesn't like Pokemon Emerald

Isaac Gravity

Supports hot-bloodedness
262
Posts
19
Years
  • Emerald...? Are you talking about Hoenn? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT HOENN?!

    But seriously... Really don't get why Gen III (outside the rather bland Gen I remakes) get so much unfair hate. The Generation the bulk of this fanbase sitdown and praise like god was nothing but more than a living flaw and it took it's third version to actually make it a half-decent game...

    As for me, I love Emerald I actually wrote why in a thread not too long ago so I'll just copy-paste it here if it's alright: "After PKMN Ruby, my faith in the franchise was revitalized due to the games heavy level of fun and replay and moreover, fixing the vast mistakes PKMN G/S/C made and went back to what made Pokemon so great. And well, despite the hype around FR/LG Hoenn still proved to be the most creative of the four regions.

    While R/S had a lot after main game while Emerald... There's just so much for the single player to do!

    I mean, 1. the story was a huge improvement over R/S by having both teams (Magma and Aqua) to combat, having two of the coolest box art legendaries duke it out as per their rivalry alluded in the previous games.

    This leads to: 2. Giving Rayquaza an importance (another cool legendary) to the game outside being some post-game 'mon to catch.

    3. Upgraded difficulty. May not say much for some, but if you started from scratch and chose to lack a certain team balance like I did, the Pokemon change-ups and slightly smarter AI would really throw you off and give you a bit more of a fight. (*Note: This is also my answer to the lack of diversity thread, cutting off access to older/stronger 'mons simply promote the newer guys who actually are quite impressive compared their predecessors.)

    4. Most important reason of all: VERY HIGH REPLAY VALUE. And compared to previous gens, R/S already beat them out from the start. But Emerald throwing in Gym Leader rematches (how long have we been begging for that), giving Berries more purpose, upgrading Breeding, giving us the ability to explore extra areas so we DON'T HAVE TO trade to get both fossils and certain Pokes AND Battle Frontier (Battle Factory, I'll finish you yet!) alongside some other fun side things, Emerald has got to be the most rewarding (and battle centric) single player game within the Pokemon main games.

    Love that game and I'm still playing it!"
     

    Harry Blue5

    I vill suck your Electricity..
    477
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen Mar 27, 2011
    Look, Emerald is good game, a cheap remake, but still a good game. If you have both Ruby and Sapphire, then you might want to buy it for it's extra features. Look up it's extra features and think if you'll like them or not.

    If you only have either Ruby or Sapphire, you might want it for the extra Pokémon and extra features, check out what Pokémon it has you can't get, and it's extra features, then decide based on that.

    If you don't have either Ruby or Sapphire, then: OMG GET EMERALD!!! IT ROXS!!!

    NOTE: Okay, my actual advice for the last one is: If you like Pokemon games, you should get it, if you love Hoenn get it, why? Because you missed out on R/S, and Emerald is a mix of them both, with extra features.
     
    1,254
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen Sep 12, 2016
    I love Hoen, love the places...
    As I said, the thing that I don't like is moving animation, the movement are worse bad Crystal has the better moving animation.
     

    Valarauca

    I > U for all real values of U
    282
    Posts
    16
    Years
  • all i can say about emerald is

    silver>emerald>crystal

    'nuff said about that
     

    Mitchman

    Banned
    7,485
    Posts
    16
    Years
  • Aha emerald is good. Grapics could have been fr/lg but hey nothings perfect. But yeah I liked it not hate it. Except for tate and liz. If you had blaizken you were screwed.
     
    457
    Posts
    18
    Years
  • I liked Emerald. I think it was a great addition. It had new features like:

    New Deoxys
    Move Tutors
    Battler Frontier
    Animated Pokemon
    Can get a G/S/C starter after completing PokeDex
    Updated Graphics

    Even though these features aren't the best, it was still fun. And to be honest, Crystal was like Emerald (a third addition). It was only Gold and Silver with some new features. So was Yellow.

    If you don't like Emerald, don't buy it.
     

    PocketPika

    Quiet Trainer
    23
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen Nov 23, 2011
    I thought Emerald was good...
    A huge step up from Ruby and Sapphire and funner then Fire Red and Leaf Green in my personal opinion.
     

    spike6958

    TCG Collector
    1,197
    Posts
    18
    Years
    • Age 35
    • UK
    • Seen Apr 30, 2021
    For me Yellow, Crystal and Emerald where the three best games, due to the games having longer and deeper storylines compared to Red/Blue, Gold/Silver and Ruby/Sapphire, also despite been dissapointed with Hoenn as a whole when Ruby/Sapphire came out, i thought Emerald was a fun, enjoyable and challanging game.
     

    Metakazam

    Is a Loon.
    42
    Posts
    16
    Years
  • Your kidding, right? Emerald brought us the best breeding in the 3rd gen by a loooooooooooong shot, access to plenty of Ditto, ingame IV checker, Jhoto Pokemon, exclusive moves via move tutors, battle tents, and finally the Battle Frontier which issued at least somewhat of a challenge post Elite 4 In my opinion the perfect setup for the true competitive game that D/P can be. Everyone has their own opinion I guess...
     

    Mystery2009

    The Legacy Begins Now
    84
    Posts
    16
    Years
  • althought it is true nintendo conspires to "make" us spend money on another game because it has a few tweaks and or items or events, nintendo makes up for it with the games longevity and longlasting design(physical design).as for emerald. i rather liked the frontier as it taught people who didnt really know, things about nature and for the first time(for some ppl) you really got indepth with ivs evs and ect. it also brings us rare move tutor moves and some of the pokemon we hold in such high regard for wifi battles so in my opinon i rather like emerald but i still dislike nintendo for not remaking s/g/c yet ~_~"
     

    Glaceon_

    Here today, [i]gone tomorrow...?[/i]
    736
    Posts
    15
    Years
  • Emerald took the shambles of RSE and made it acceptable. I do not hate it, nor do I think it was overtly excellent.

    I'm pretty much going to agree with this; I personally didn't really like the Third Generation of Pokemon; not because of its Pokemon, but because of its setting, and the execution of said setting. Hoenn had potential to be a great Region, but in my opinion, it shadowed itself. I personally didn't really like the lack of variety, when training certain types of Pokemon, such as Fire, Ground and Rock.

    I'm probably going too far into personal preferences, here, but it also turned the first Generation where I didn't like the Water type Starter, which I had liked Gen I and Gen II's quite comfortably, and it brought the most pointless pre-evolution imaginable, into the world of Pokemon; Wynaut. Why they saw it fit to bring in a pre-evo of a pot luck Pokemon is beyond me.. that's actually the only thing I don't like Generation II for; Wobbuffet..

    Anyways, I digress; Emerald sort of made up for the somewhat optimistic blunder of Ruby and Sapphire. It still retained its "God, this is so tedious" training times, (on Ruby, I never got a Pokemon to Level 100; close, but never all the way, while on D/P, I've got 4 in a quarter of the time owning it) but it wasn't as noticeable as it had been with R/S; at least to me. Battle Frontier expanded upon the Battle Tower idea of Crystal even more, which wasn't a bad touch; especially for those with a liking for competitive battling; it was in there for the extra challenge.
     
    321
    Posts
    17
    Years
    • Seen Apr 28, 2010
    Emerald was better then R/S imo. If you got through R/S and then bought Emerald a few months later, you're bound to dislike it, thats the nature of the games released as the 3rd games.
    I like firered/leafgreen tbh
     

    .emerald

    ☆ + ♥
    1,072
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen Apr 13, 2014
    maybe... he just got so bumed about losing in frontier(always), not catching all the legends & so on... or he got used to the other gens.... thats why he said emerald isnt a good game. for me emerald is the first & best game that i have. not to brag but... i completed my pokedex & finished frontier(silver & gold, somthing HE could not do)
     

    Locke Yggdrasill

    You have not the right.
    196
    Posts
    18
    Years
  • Default
    maybe... he just got so bumed about losing in frontier(always), not catching all the legends & so on... or he got used to the other gens.... thats why he said emerald isnt a good game. for me emerald is the first & best game that i have. not to brag but... i completed my pokedex & finished frontier(silver & gold, somthing HE could not do)
    Are you referring to me? If so, lol. If Emerald was your first game, then you're obviously not going to find any flaws in it. For those of us who played Ruby and Sapphire, much less R/B/Y/G/S/C, we (or atleast I) was/were expecting a more epic battle than just two pokemon shifting back and forth in a two sprite animation. Also, the new features didn't excite me too much because I'm not one for battling, however I did breeze through the battle frontier. Also I caught all the one-off pokemon in it, however I got too bored with it to complete my pokedex. It's not that I'm not competent enough to enjoy it, it's that I'm too competent to enjoy it. ;)
     

    .emerald

    ☆ + ♥
    1,072
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen Apr 13, 2014
    Are you referring to me? If so, lol. If Emerald was your first game, then you're obviously not going to find any flaws in it. For those of us who played Ruby and Sapphire, much less R/B/Y/G/S/C, we (or atleast I) was/were expecting a more epic battle than just two pokemon shifting back and forth in a two sprite animation. Also, the new features didn't excite me too much because I'm not one for battling, however I did breeze through the battle frontier. Also I caught all the one-off pokemon in it, however I got too bored with it to complete my pokedex. It's not that I'm not competent enough to enjoy it, it's that I'm too competent to enjoy it. ;)

    no, im not reffering to you(sorry!) im reffering to the guy who started the thread...
     

    GKS

    Retired Hacker
    1,320
    Posts
    16
    Years
    • Seen Dec 23, 2013
    Emerald is, in my opinion, better than R/S, but still, it is viritually a copy of R/S with some changes. Yellow, Crystal, Emerald and Platinum are all like that.
     

    legendtaker

    I steal legends. MWAHAHAHA
    30
    Posts
    16
    Years
  • emerald is better than r/s, because unlike r/s you can catch both kyogre, groudon and mew, which you could not catch in the newer games until emerald. and if anyone has any major complaints go take it to nintendo. though they'll just tell you to head home.
    and Goldie, who are you to bring down a pokemon game. Do you even own or have played pokemon emerald eh??
     
    Back
    Top