5th Gen Why do you think Black and White has recieved so many bad remarks?

[Ninjagon]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

There's effectively no postgame

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

many of the new designs were lackluster

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

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.

the region was boring

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

 

[ShinyUmbreon189]

^
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]

^
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]

1. Don't try to argue with me cuz I know im gonna win

Don't be so sure.

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.

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.

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.

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]

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]

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]

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.

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:

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]

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]

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