Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation III

[H-con]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

The Trainer House in HGSS is much less rewarding than the Secret Bases, giving that each trainer only gives you 1 BP, with a maximum of ten per cart. And as I already said, many of the Pokémon main titles are intended to be played with another person, so many of the features of Generation III games (and even Generation IV) were made towards that direction. Sorry if you can't connect/interact with someone but it's not an excuse per se to downgrade the value of a feature in an objective fashion.

But is it objective of you to completely ignore that some players have to play alone? Shouldn't that alone be considered at all?

Believe it or not, 2-on-2 battles were a revolution: why do you think that nowadays, official tournaments use that format as their default one? Besides that, currently there isn't a solid fan-made tier system that focuses on Doubles, because the format is so rich in strategies and less predictable that you can't really set in stone the position or hierarchy of a Pokémon.

I find double-battles to be boring because in-game, they're way to predictable. I'm well aware that you can find many strategies concerning to format, but I'm not very inclined to actually use them, and I battle as I do regularly anyways. That's why I feel they're boring, because I don't feel that they give me anything that a regular battle don't. I prefer the single battles best, and quite frankly, I would have been perfectly happy with just having that function.

Besides that, Ruby and Sapphire failed epicly at actually using the function at all. Call it revolution all you want, the true revolution didn't come before thy got widespread usage, which didn't happen when the concept first were launched.

Yet again, I stand in my position that you're just critizing Hoenn on the basis that things like Dive 'suck'

(Is it unrealistic? what a weak argument you have here considering all the things that don't make any sense in the games and yet they are praised for being good)

Dive is not inly unrealistic, but it is set in a generally boring area (I for one didn't really awe at the underwater-areas...) and the pokémon are all the same, basically. Is that reason enough for you, or are you going to jump to conclusions?

that it doesn't have any other areas and content after the Elite 4 to explore, a moot point I think because you can't do anything but rematch trainers (and only in FRLG, because in GSC there are like one or two trainers to rebattle in Kanto) and Pokémon hunting when you're done with the story (you don't really need new areas to catch more Pokémon).

Here I think you ignore one of the mist fundamental issues, which is exploring. I love to explore new areas. Hoenn didn't do a thing in this department compared to other games.

Besides, the more areas, the more varied pokémon you can (at least generally) catch. Add some more trainers to the mix, and it gets even better. It's not just rematches you know.

If those are the things that you actually consider rewarding then my problem is that you play the games mostly from a casual approach and I enjoy more the things you can do after finishing the exploration and the story, to create competitive strategies and such.

Of course it isn't, but when Hoenn removes the option to do the two things I like the most, then of course I'm going to find the game less interesting than the other games. I just don't feel the need to try to achieve team-perfection, to win much in the Tower/Frontier or win in the contests, because quite frankly, those things don't interest me. Why should I do things that don't interest me?

Don't quote me again because it's clear that we aren't on the same line of tastes or opinions.

And so? Should I not respond to your points just because we disagree? What an odd way to debate... If you obviously don't want me to respond to you, then I suggest you don't respond to my points at all, because what you write here shows me only that you think your opinion or taste is superior. If this isn't the case, then I apologize, but I can't help to think it from the way you word yourself.

I'm going to make myself clear. I don't hate generation III, it's just that it's the generation that doesn't drag me in and wants me to stay in the game when I'm "done" with it. Blue, Gold, FireRed (thus you should understand that it's not generation III as a whole I don't like all that much, it's just Hoenn really), Platinum and HeartGold all did this. Hoenn just simply didn't do this. There's a lot of contributing factors to this, of course, but isn't that reason enough?

 

[RudolphMilotic]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

But is it objective of you to completely ignore that some players have to play alone? Shouldn't that alone be considered at all?

Again, it's not the fault of the developers if you can't afford friends or some people to trade with and still consider the features they decided to include pointless or insignificant. You can say it's an objective judgement, but it isn't.

Besides that, Ruby and Sapphire failed epicly at actually using the function at all. Call it revolution all you want, the true revolution didn't come before thy got widespread usage, which didn't happen when the concept first were launched.

And still they introduced the concept, so they deserve as much credit as the later games which reinforced the format. By the way, in Japan they were a success the moment Ruby & Sapphire were released.

Dive is not inly unrealistic, but it is set in a generally boring area (I for one didn't really awe at the underwater-areas...) and the pokémon are all the same, basically. Is that reason enough for you, or are you going to jump to conclusions?

It's enough reason to consider it just a subjective point of view, the same with many of your last arguments, and of course a weak, pathetic one in my also opinion. Write or paraphrase about it as much as you can, but I'm not buying any of your views.

And so? Should I not respond to your points just because we disagree? What an odd way to debate... If you obviously don't want me to respond to you, then I suggest you don't respond to my points at all, because what you write here shows me only that you think your opinion or taste is superior.

I didn't come to this thread with the intention of making a debate (and yet I was dragged into one anyway...) but merely to stand my position against what I consider just hatred or unfounded/biased dislike for the RSE games. At least I think my reasons have more valid points, a background and a fundament, not necessarily because they're superior or in a plane high above yours; I'm not just saying things such as 'I don't like', 'I hate' or 'I find boring' when critizing GSC, for example, so that's why I decided to quote you and make a questioning out of your reasons, seeing that many of them rely purely on personal things you didn't like from the games and not because they're actual issues within the versions that Game Freak should have corrected or handled in a different way. For all of this I wrote that you didn't have to quote me again, because we could keep on the discussion forever and we'll never be content with the feelings and thoughts of each other, seeing the much diverse opinions we got.

For the meantime, I'm done with this. Feel free to ignore what I typed in the last paragraph and, if you want, make a multitude of quotes again, though I'm not replying back. I'm satisfied with this penultimate thinking of yours, one of the few good ones if you ask me:

Of course it isn't, but when Hoenn removes the option to do the two things I like the most, then of course I'm going to find the game less interesting than the other games. I just don't feel the need to try to achieve team-perfection, to win much in the Tower/Frontier or win in the contests, because quite frankly, those things don't interest me. Why should I do things that don't interest me?

 

[Orion-Sama]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Besides that, Ruby and Sapphire failed epicly at actually using the function at all. Call it revolution all you want, the true revolution didn't come before thy got widespread usage, which didn't happen when the concept first were launched.

Heh, this sounds familiar. Oh right, there were two new Types introduced during second Generation, which got absolutely no proper introduction either.

How many Dark Pokémon could you get before the Elite Four in GS? One. Yes, only one. And it's not very easy to get it either at that point unless you spend a lot of time and money to raise an Eevee's friendship. Crystal tried to do something by adding Sneasel to the Ice Path, but it's still clear that the Dark Type was too rare in the games they were introduced at.

Steel wasn't as bad, but still had some issues in their distribution. For one, Skarmory was exclusive to Silver Version. Then comes Magnemite and Forretress, which don't learn a Steel Move at all. Steelix and Scizor are virtually unobtainable before the S.S. Fast unless you spend insane amounts of time and money to get a Metal Coat from wild Magnemite.

At least the 3rd Generation fixed the lack of Double Battles within its own Generation, with Emerald and the Game Cube games. It took until 3rd Generation for Dark and Steel Pokémon... hell, for 2nd Generation Pokémon to be properly focused on.

 

[H-con]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Again, it's not the fault of the developers if you can't afford friends or some people to trade with and still consider the features they decided to include pointless or insignificant. You can say it's an objective judgement, but it isn't.

If I can't afford to have someone to play with? It's hardly my fault that I don't have anyone to play with, is it not? For me, I want a game that doesn't heavily rely on others in order to get really good material for the game (although pokémon-games have always done this by using version-exclusives, but that's not my point really).

It's enough reason to consider it just a subjective point of view, the same with many of your last arguments, and of course a weak, pathetic one in my also opinion. Write or paraphrase about it as much as you can, but I'm not buying any of your views.

Yet you want to consider it an objective point because? These areas are nothing really different from a cave at all, you have the same pokémon, you "walk" around in a very cave-like area, and quite frankly, the only difference is that you have to use a HM just to get there, which doesn't make it all that special.

I didn't come to this thread with the intention of making a debate (and yet I was dragged into one anyway...) but merely to stand my position against what I consider just hatred or unfounded/biased dislike for the RSE games.

What hatred? What unfounded hatred even exists? I have clearly put up a very valid reason for my dislike of the generation III-games, is that unfounded bias to you? Is it unfounded bias that I dislike Hoenn because of it's lack of believable plot, virtually nothing to do once you're done with the E4 (and that's my opinion, if anyone asks), a generally boring region (the tropical thing just didn't catch on, Fortree is the best example of what I think is wrong with Hoenn, Pacifidolog as well. Even for a pokémon-game, taht's really too much, and in their attempt to break the mold, I think they went a bit too far...) with a way too high focus on water-routes, yet virtually no interesting pokémon exists in these routes (the only exception is perhaps the 1% or something chance of meeting a Wailord...), generally Dive, which I find not very interesting for reasons already mentioned (not very creative, unrealistic, boring and repetitive pokémon) and lack of pokémon that really interests me to use them (Flygon and Salamence gets boring in the long run, the only pokémon I don't get tired of is Gardevoir, says a lot doesn't it?) are all things that I don't really like with Hoenn.

I know you say you won't reply, but is this really what you call unfounded bias?

 

[siburke939]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

i often see people ask for reasoning behind the G3 games criticism & i personally can't put my finger on it but i just didn't enjoy them...

in hindsight they had some great pokemon (sceptile / swampert / ludicolo / shiftry / swellow / breloom / slaking / shedinja / flygon / milotic / metagross / kyogre / rayquaza / many more - but they're my faves) & some interesting features but i don't get that "warm" feeling when i recall playing the games

i'm sure i am not alone in this - i'm not a "g3 hater" but i was underwhelmed at the time

 

[ToadDude]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

To me, Gen.III was a little... unsatisfing. But. The Pokémon introdused were pretty cool when the Phisical/Special Split came.

 

[Articwolf10]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

I really like GenII to be honest I like how they had so many new pokemon. The starters are pretty cool (Treeko ftw) And Hoenn was very pretty. I didn't mind the fact that it couldn't connect with the first two Gen's it had to be done. And the reason there wasn't a day/night thing in R/S/E was because it would have drained the battery like it did in S/G/C

 

[UnownUnknown]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

MUDKIPZ!!! OI OI OI!

 

[nash20]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Hi this is my first post so apologies if i make any mistakes,

I believe that the third generation games were always going to get a bashing from portions of the fanbase this game was pokemon's difficult third album so to speak. And they had a really hard act to follow as the GSC were developed to be the crowning glory of the franchise "I worked with the assumption that after we put out Gold and Silver, my work as far as Pokémon was concerned would be done," explains Pokémon Company president Tsunekazu Ishihara. "I didn’t intend to make any more Pokémon titles. I even thought that once we entered the twenty-first centuary it would be time for me to do something else entirely". (http://www.destructoid.com/pokemon-gold-silver-were-meant-to-be-the-series-finale-166848.phtml)

There was never meant to be a III Gen and when one was commisioned they decided to take the franchise in a new direction a very bold and courageous move in my opinion. And yes there were teething issues and yes no bloody backward capablitiy and a clunky storyline at times(RS)im looking at you, but without it there would probably never been a IV or V Gen and while the III Gen games will never be my favorite games in the series i will always have a certain respect for them.

 

[Trainer-c]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

That interview just shows how Ishihara was not aware of Game Freaks inner workings. This is evident by fact that he was shocked as Blue and Yellow came along while he was focusing and building hype for Gold and Silver. In his mind Gold and Silver were going to be the last titles. There is no indication that was ever the case with Game Freak.

I agree that after Gold and Silver, Ruby and Sapphire had big shoes to fill and with the added effects of the global phenomenon phase ending, it was the perfect combination of the game having some key faults, and an environment where those flaws would be magnified.

 

[Magma Leader Maxie]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Oh you second gen fanboys. Perhaps you should be taught how wrong you truly are, what with your "2nd gen makes my penis feel large" and such.

Yes, I believe that the time for that should be coming.

 

[TTEchidna]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

And the reason there wasn't a day/night thing in R/S/E was because it would have drained the battery like it did in S/G/C

Go to your room. See that clock on the wall? Run by the internal battery. Runs the Berries and Shoal Cave. There's not even the slightest reason for them not having the visible day-night cycle, days of the week, or otherwise except for the fact that they either couldn't make it look good or just got lazy.

Oh you second gen fanboys. Perhaps you should be taught how wrong you truly are, what with your "2nd gen makes my penis feel large" and such.

Yes, I believe that the time for that should be coming.

That's Gen IV. And it's almost 14 feet tall, thanks.

 

[HerbieHero]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Heh, this sounds familiar. Oh right, there were two new Types introduced during second Generation, which got absolutely no proper introduction either.

How many Dark Pokémon could you get before the Elite Four in GS? One. Yes, only one. And it's not very easy to get it either at that point unless you spend a lot of time and money to raise an Eevee's friendship. Crystal tried to do something by adding Sneasel to the Ice Path, but it's still clear that the Dark Type was too rare in the games they were introduced at.

Steel wasn't as bad, but still had some issues in their distribution. For one, Skarmory was exclusive to Silver Version. Then comes Magnemite and Forretress, which don't learn a Steel Move at all. Steelix and Scizor are virtually unobtainable before the S.S. Fast unless you spend insane amounts of time and money to get a Metal Coat from wild Magnemite.

At least the 3rd Generation fixed the lack of Double Battles within its own Generation, with Emerald and the Game Cube games. It took until 3rd Generation for Dark and Steel Pokémon... hell, for 2nd Generation Pokémon to be properly focused on.

But consider Dark-type moves. The main reason Dark was introduced was to help balance Psychic, and since it was Psychic Pokemon themselves that were the problem, as long as there were accessible Dark-type moves then the plan would work--and with the frequency of Pokemon that could learn Bite or had Pursuit added to their learnset, that was no problem. Plus, each of the new types had a Trainer challenge dedicated to them--a gym for Steel and an Elite Four member for Dark. Even if you didn't use the new Pokemon, you still had to think about them, which is arguably better because that lets you start using them with foreknowledge of what does/doesn't beat them. And I don't see how you can say that Gen II Pokemon weren't properly focused on until Gen III when the Hoenn Pokedex was almost entirely dedicated to new Pokemon.

Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike the Gen III games, but I feel that until HGSS, the Gen II games were the best there were when taken in context of what they were building on.

 

[Shinx3000]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Go to your room. See that clock on the wall? Run by the internal battery. Runs the Berries and Shoal Cave. There's not even the slightest reason for them not having the visible day-night cycle, days of the week, or otherwise except for the fact that they either couldn't make it look good or just got lazy.

I never knew about the day/night cycle either, I knew about the clock, but I thought that was just for timed events like growing berries and shoal cave, this just happened, reguardless. If it was a visible day/night, it would have made it much clearer there was a day/night t all. Was there any pokemon that appeared only at night in RSE? I don't remember there being any

Offtopic: I see a few people say Gen II is better than Gen III, what I would like (I'm not the one to do it as I don't know much about Gen II) is to have an indepth non biased view of each Gen, what was good and bad about it based on what we had to go on at the time (not based on stuff we have now like new moves or altered types) and maybe that might help give us a good view on what is actually the best Gen.

 

[Battaman]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Gen 3 don't have day/night, it has time. Kinda big difference.

 

[TM2-Megatron]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Gen 3 don't have day/night, it has time. Kinda big difference.

It amounts to the same thing in terms of hardware, though. Both Gen II and III cartridges featured a real-time-clock that ran off a battery.

The only thing not done in Gen III was to include graphical differences for the areas, based on the time of day/night. Day and night clearly still exist, though, as you're able to get both Espeon and Umbreon in the games.

 

[Spikeheila]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

It amounts to the same thing in terms of hardware, though. Both Gen II and III cartridges featured a real-time-clock that ran off a battery.

The only thing not done in Gen III was to include graphical differences for the areas, based on the time of day/night. Day and night clearly still exist, though, as you're able to get both Espeon and Umbreon in the games.

Except in FireRed and leafGreen, where it lacks the clock system

 

[Battaman]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

There are no special Pokemon for day/night in gen3, except Espeon/Umbereon, which you can't get in the first games of the gen anyway, no graphic difference, no difference at all save for Shoal Cave, no day specific events.

No, Gen3 did not have day/Night it had a clock that showed time, but it did not have night. Only day all the time.

 

[RudolphMilotic]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

There are no special Pokemon for day/night in gen3, except Espeon/Umbereon, which you can't get in the first games of the gen anyway, no graphic difference, no difference at all save for Shoal Cave, no day specific events.

And of course those are the things why I don't consider the real-time clock of GSC a big deal and a game-breaking feature: Day/night Pokémon are just a joke, a way to force you to play the game on a given time span (even more if you take into account competitive features such as EV training) and adds nothing of value once you catch the so-called 'exclusive' Pokémon, giving that you can simply breed it later to get another one or search for it in the GTS (Generation IV only). RSE even did it better with the Shoal Cave, with no other place or in-game location introduced before or later that can be navigated in a different way depending on the hour you come to visit it. Besides, after FireRed and LeafGreen were released, Espeon and Umbreon were as common in many teams of RSE as you could think about: Eevee is not a Hoenn Pokémon per se and it didn't gain any new evolutions back then so Ruby & Sapphire didn't have the need to include it.

Much of the above can be said about day-specific events as well: the bargain sale of the Goldenrod Underground is a pretty forgettable (pointless I would say) chance, the Slateport City mall's promotions are much better than Buena's Password show and the Lucky Number show was changed from a once-per-week event to a daily-experience with the Lotto Ticket Corner of Lilycove City's Dept. Store. The new Battle Tower was a much better option to get items than the IR Mystery Gift, and the same can be said about Secret Bases VS the Trainer House. In Sapphire it was easier to snatch Moon Stones from wild Lunatone than waiting for Monday to happen and get one from Mt. Moon Square. The only thing RSE lack is a person that can raise the happiness of your Pokémon, but with the new introduced Soothe Bell, the Luxury Ball, Secret Bases that hand out a lot of Exp. Points and later in Emerald with the EV-reducing berries, it was quicker to up the friendship of your Pokémon in those versions than in GSC. The Weekday siblings don't do anything after you encounter them for the first time in GSC so they don't really count as daily-events, and in Pacifidlog Town you could get Frustration or Return every seven days, just as it was back then with the Goldenrod City's Dept. Store. The S.S. Aqua isn't actually a rewarding event when you can't rematch again the trainers once you make a full travel from Olivine to Vermilion and viceversa. And please, the Trendy vocabulary, Seals and Julia Ribbons are Generation IV features copy-pasted from DPt so don't bring them to the table.

By the way, there were Hoenn-exclusive time-related events: Berry growth, the Berry Master, Lilycove City's clear-out sale and the Blend Master (Emerald only); Secret Bases trainers also could count as such. I don't know about you but I prefer changes in the actual gameplay experience as opposed to minor graphical, cosmetic changes in the overworld, which aren't anything else but eye-candy. And now with HGSS you can change the time and date on your DS without needing a password generator or worrying about something -sans Warden Baoba's Safari Zone- that disrupts your experience, so there it goes the true value of a dense time-related approach for a game.

 

[Magma Leader Maxie]

Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

That's Gen IV. And it's almost 14 feet tall, thanks.

Sorry, Johto fanboys. My mistake. In any case, disregarding the gloriousness of Hoenn and the 3rd generation is something I suggest you not do.

14 feet tall? You sound like a 10 year old trying to make a witty comeback but failing horribly. In fact, that was so bad, I think a kitten was killed somewhere in this world by it's owners in a dark alleyway filled with rats to feed on the dead corpse so that the kitten could never even receive a proper funeral, assuming a person kind enough to walk by it would even consider giving it such a thing. Your response was that horrible.