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

[Vash teh Stampede]

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

I'm so sick of the "Why is gen 3 criticized so much?" posts. The answer: it sucks!


I guess the truth hurts for some people.

Generation 3 was the worst. Period. Nothing will convince me to believe otherwise. As I said before, these games where the reason I stopped playing Pokemon until this year.

I lol'd at your pitiful argument. You have no reasons. It would be so nice if you could STFU and stop acting lie yuo're opinion is the most superior.

 

[PDL]

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

4. I don't like IVs, it's stupid to have to recatch a Pokemon over and over again to get one with the best base stats by "luck". No way to see what the IVs even were was also annoying. I know I'll get flamed for this, but hear me out, I'm cool with the Steroid items that let you pop a certain amount of pills into your Pokemon to buff it up, but the whole "Whoops sorry your Steelix has weak base stats against the other guy with your exact same moveset sorry you lose" mindset REALLY pisses me off to this day. Pokemon always felt like Chess to me, and in Chess you don't throw back the pieces because they hidden numbers aren't good enough. This also messed up the semi-realistic bond some people felt to their Pokemon earlier.

Big joke, IVs have been around since Gen I. It's just that there wasn't much of a competitive scene back then. It was still in it's hype days when everyone was still new to the premise.

It's only later that people actually delved into the coding and found how stats differed from individual to individual. This was actually outright stated by an NPC in the Gen I games itself.

So yeah, this complaint doesn't really count towards how the Gen III games sucked. It's because you didn't know about this Random Number Generating system that was around since Pokémon's conception.

 

[Trainer-c]

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

Nice editorial.

Now I throw in my two cents on the transition between generations II and III.

State of Fandom:
Generation III suffered the unfortunate timing of being released after the initial "Pokémon Phenomenon" had died out. In fact, it was released right in the heyday of the "Pokémon is passé" trend that ran through the early 2000s. For better or for worse, this forced the games to stand on their own merit, and to face a smaller and more "core" fanbase.

Compatibility:
If there's anything a fanbase hates, it's change, whether it's good or bad is irrelevant. With the new hardware Gen III brought a list of changes, the biggest one being incompatibility with the previous titles. Needless to say this upset a great deal of those fans and would be regarded as a serious strike against the titles.

Story:
This links back to the fanbase and its disdain for change. After a second generation that was so heavily intertwined with the first, it was shocking to the "core" base to see Hoenn, which stood independent of previous characters, and scenarios from the previous generations. Add to this the notable lack of a coherent plan among the villains (not that Team Rocket's plans were particularly epic villainy), and the lack of presence and development for the rival (who already suffers for not being a taunting jerk, or a hitting, shoving badass) and you have a story that leaves a bad taste to those that so enjoyed the story in the previous games.

I happen to have enjoyed the third generation as much as the second, the first, and the fourth. All games have their faults, and the Gen III faults are no worse than the faults in any other game in the series, but due to the nature of fandoms in general, something has to be the whipping boy, and Gen III is it.

 

[Lysandre]

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

Big joke, IVs have been around since Gen I. It's just that there wasn't much of a competitive scene back then. It was still in it's hype days when everyone was still new to the premise.

It's only later that people actually delved into the coding and found how stats differed from individual to individual. This was actually outright stated by an NPC in the Gen I games itself.

So yeah, this complaint doesn't really count towards how the Gen III games sucked. It's because you didn't know about this Random Number Generating system that was around since Pokémon's conception.

I realize that IVs have been around for a while, they were the only way the game was able to randomly generate shiny Pokemon in Gen II. The difference is that now we have Pokerus which helps with it, EV training, all these items that try to capitalize on helping you with them, natures that actually AFFECT them at random, little characteristics... the difference is that now it's actually encouraged to fool around for hours trying to get the perfect Pokemon through trying to get the perfect combo of random IVs/perfect EV training/best Nature/best ability/best random characteristic like "enjoys being a jerk"/a bunch of items you give them to help. Although I DO feel that GameFreak has capitalized on them recently by making them actually mean something, appear more obvious without all-out showing exact stats, and encourage ways to tweak them in such minute detail, the new competitive mindset is ANOTHER reason I feel the games went downhill. You can say "It's not that Gen 3 was different, you were just out of the loop because there wasn't a competitive crowd obsessed with it to point it out" all day, but the issue is that there is now a competitive crowd obsessed with it to point it out. Find me one post from a message board before the release of Ruby and Sapphire littered with "FINALLY GOT AN ADAMANT LUGIA WITH A 31 IV IN ATTACK THAT LIKES TO EAT FOOD AFTER TEN HOURS OF RESETTING" , "Trash the Typhlosion, it's IVs suck"', "Can ny1 breed me a hastee poochena?", etc. etc. etc. Just because the fandom is to blame doesn't mean that it made the change any more enjoyable to me. Bulbapedia, this forum's very mother site, says "In Generation III, the IV system was completely overhauled." My issue is not IVs in general, it's how they affected the game/metagame starting in Gen III. Gen 1 and 2 were just as competitive, in a less massive environment due to a lack of internet connectivity, but you could still go down to the local game store's tournament and win with a better moveset against a Pokemon of the same species instead of losing against a tank because they spent 20 hours getting every little piece of code just so. I just prefer the more simplistic view of the system because I prefer to rely on strategy instead of the pure number of hours I have to pump into killing 30 Zubats with my Hasty Gengar to make it faster than your Alakazam that has bad IVs and therefore should not exist, k?

And please, don't try to brand me off as one of those "GEN III SUCKS DOWN WITH NEW POKEYMANS 150 WAS ENOUGH" loons, because I'm not. "this complaint doesn't really count towards how the Gen III games sucked." makes it sound like I'm trying to say I think the games suck, which I do NOT. The topic is about general complaints against Gen III, and EXCUSE ME for not LOVING EVERY ASPECT OF THE GAMES, but I like them overall. As I said, I thought it was the best region yet, had Pokemon of the same par of the first two gens, and had a good story, stating a few qualms I had with the Generation as a whole does not mean I think it "sucks". I could write a list twice that long about Gen IV and, likely soon, Gen V, hell I could write a list the same size as I did for Gen III for the first Gens. I can understand going after the posts that just say "GEN III SUCKS BECAUSE IT CAME OUT ON THE GAME BOY ADVANCED" but... really? "A big joke?" Give me a break.

 

[PDL]

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

I realize that IVs have been around for a while, they were the only way the game was able to randomly generate shiny Pokemon in Gen II. The difference is that now we have Pokerus which helps with it, EV training, all these items that try to capitalize on helping you with them, natures that actually AFFECT them at random, little characteristics... the difference is that now it's actually encouraged to fool around for hours trying to get the perfect Pokemon through trying to get the perfect combo of random IVs/perfect EV training/best Nature/best ability/best random characteristic like "enjoys being a jerk"/a bunch of items you give them to help. Although I DO feel that GameFreak has capitalized on them recently by making them actually mean something, appear more obvious without all-out showing exact stats, and encourage ways to tweak them in such minute detail, the new competitive mindset is ANOTHER reason I feel the games went downhill. You can say "It's not that Gen 3 was different, you were just out of the loop because there wasn't a competitive crowd obsessed with it to point it out" all day, but the issue is that there is now a competitive crowd obsessed with it to point it out. Find me one post from a message board before the release of Ruby and Sapphire littered with "FINALLY GOT AN ADAMANT LUGIA WITH A 31 IV IN ATTACK THAT LIKES TO EAT FOOD AFTER TEN HOURS OF RESETTING" , "Trash the Typhlosion, it's IVs suck"', "Can ny1 breed me a hastee poochena?", etc. etc. etc. Just because the fandom is to blame doesn't mean that it made the change any more enjoyable to me. Bulbapedia, this forum's very mother site, says "In Generation III, the IV system was completely overhauled." My issue is not IVs in general, it's how they affected the game/metagame starting in Gen III. Gen 1 and 2 were just as competitive, in a less massive environment due to a lack of internet connectivity, but you could still go down to the local game store's tournament and win with a better moveset against a Pokemon of the same species instead of losing against a tank because they spent 20 hours getting every little piece of code just so. I just prefer the more simplistic view of the system because I prefer to rely on strategy instead of the pure number of hours I have to pump into killing 30 Zubats with my Hasty Gengar to make it faster than your Alakazam that has bad IVs and therefore should not exist, k?

And please, don't try to brand me off as one of those "GEN III SUCKS DOWN WITH NEW POKEYMANS 150 WAS ENOUGH" loons, because I'm not. "this complaint doesn't really count towards how the Gen III games sucked." makes it sound like I'm trying to say I think the games suck, which I do NOT. The topic is about general complaints against Gen III, and EXCUSE ME for not LOVING EVERY ASPECT OF THE GAMES, but I like them overall. As I said, I thought it was the best region yet, had Pokemon of the same par of the first two gens, and had a good story, stating a few qualms I had with the Generation as a whole does not mean I think it "sucks". I could write a list twice that long about Gen IV and, likely soon, Gen V, hell I could write a list the same size as I did for Gen III for the first Gens. I can understand going after the posts that just say "GEN III SUCKS BECAUSE IT CAME OUT ON THE GAME BOY ADVANCED" but... really? "A big joke?" Give me a break.

What a long boring-ass post.

It's really pathetic that all it amounts to whining about how competitive Pokémon is. If you don't like the competitive aspect. FUCKING IGNORE IT. JUST PLAY THE REGULAR GAME LIKE THAT SIDE DOES NOT EXIST. WHAT EVER YOU DO, STOP MOANING AND WEEPING IN THIS VALLEY OF TEARS.

Some people actually want to face off against other people, this doesn't just appear in Pokémon, any game that has mutliplayer has a metagame. Smash Bros, Magic: The Gathering, you name it.

 

[Captain GIROG]

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

Change: Scaring people since forever.

What really rubs me the wrong way is the fact that people say GameFreak did a lazy job of designing Gen3 pokémon. Well, I'd like to direct your attention to Ponyta/Rapidash, Voltorb/Electrode, Poliwhirl/Poliwrath, Grimer/Muk, etc. These are all evolutions that are really just a slight change in body shape. Not too original. Compare these to the NEW AND EXCITING pokémon of Gen3; such as the Ralts, Mudkip, Treecko, Torchic, Lotad, Seedot, Nincada, Shroomish, Baltoy, Barboach, Sableye, Mawile, Caravhana, Trapinch, Makuhita, Electrike, Numel, Cacnea, Snorunt, Spoink, Duskull, Slakoth, Gulpin, Tropius, Whismur, et cetera families, I believe Hoenn has some of the MOST ORIGINAL POKEMON.

That's not to say the other gens suck, I just think Hoenn is better in terms of everything. I've played Pokémon since I got Red version for my eighth birthday, and I have to admit that Scyther/Scizor are some of my ULTIMATE PIRATE FAVOURITE Pokémon.
Not many things get to be ULTIMATE PIRATE FAVOURITES.

The whole thing boils down to opinion- In this case, I think it's just time for y'all to take off your rose-tinted goggles and set nostalgia to 0.
Or I'll send a mudkip to eat you in the face.

 

[Lysandre]

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

What a long boring-ass post.

It's really pathetic that all it amounts to whining about how competitive Pokémon is. If you don't like the competitive aspect. FUCKING IGNORE IT. JUST PLAY THE REGULAR GAME LIKE THAT SIDE DOES NOT EXIST. WHAT EVER YOU DO, STOP MOANING AND WEEPING IN THIS VALLEY OF TEARS.

Some people actually want to face off against other people, this doesn't just appear in Pokémon, any game that has mutliplayer has a metagame. Smash Bros, Magic: The Gathering, you name it.

Ah, I see. Either I'm "one big joke" because I'm not supporting my points or I'm supporting them too much and being "boring ass".

I DO "fucking ignore it". I still play the damn games, God knows I've blown countless money on the new games to buy Diamond, the strategy guide, a replace for that one when my friend ruined it, Pearl for my friend, SoulSilver for me, HeartGold for my friend... I just prefer the old game mechanics better. It's a matter of preference, and although I find your opinion equally "really pathetic" I don't whine about it or attempt to belittle you for having it. Metagame is one thing, being able to actually play is another.

Cynthia of the Elite Four in Gen IV has perfect IVs on all Pokemon. Perfect.

Should I "fucking ignore" the fact that all of my Pokemon are being blown away because I got the short end of the luck stick?

I can't play the game like it doesn't exist. I could ignore it when the creators and the rest of the world ignored it. But when we have berries to raise EVs, berries to lower EVs, items to raise IVs, items to help make EV training easier, illnesses to make IV and EV training easier, natures that will make your Pokemon deficient in a certain area to make them stronger in a certain area, meaning that if you plan to use a different strategy (which used to be the ONLY way to win a match, so don't say I can just IGNORE the huge blow to it that ignoring natures does), the specific stats that are increased or decreased being in red and blue on the stat screen... it's obvious, it's a new game. I can't just pretend that they didn't overhaul the entire system for Gen 3 and on, because NEWSFLASH- THEY DID.

I WANT to face off against other people. I don't want to sit in the corner and beat Bug Catchers over and over again going "HEE HEE HEE I BEAT A CATERPIE". Pokemon was always competitive and I was always extremely active in the hardcore community, which, believe it or not, EXISTED BEFORE GENERATION THREE. This thread is about what you like or dislike in the Generation, and I happened to enjoy battling others more when it relied less on breeding for the ultimate Pokemon with the perfect IVs/EVs/Nature/Abilities/Characteristics and more on Rock/Paper/Scissors type planning and pure strategy. That was my personal preference. I'm letting you play your chess with a bunch of pieces that are all made of different metals that fly around and shoot binary lasers of code at each other, and although I'm playing the same game as you I used to enjoy it more when it was plain old black pieces vs. white pieces and it relied on what moves you made.

Is that so preposterous?

What it comes down to is that I'm explaining what I personally liked and disliked about the Gen, and you're ceaselessly bashing me for disliking it, for either not supporting my opinion, having an invalid opinion, explaining my opinion in a "boring-ass" manner or having a "pathetic" opinion.

You enjoy your opinion, I'll enjoy mine. I enjoyed being a part of the competitive community more back when the system relied less on having the most hours to kill hundreds of Zubats, but I carried through to the Zubat-fightin community of today and I still fight in it, although I don't find it to be as enjoyable. We're both a part of the current metagame now, and we can spend all day with me writing boring ass replies and you telling me you have the only correct opinion and that I should fucking ignore everything that I don't like and bow down to Groudon, or we can let this topic continue and see what other opinions there are. I'm choosing the latter option, but if you want to continue our boring ass battle to make me fucking ignore the new system overhaul, let's take it to PMs, or at least give an opposite reason to why you LIKE the IV system, k?

Because although I love "MOANING AND WEEPING IN THIS VALLEY OF TEARS" by stating what I liked and dislike in a topic about stating what you liked or disliked, I am now disrupting the holy Hoenn sanctuary of your mind by FINDING SOME PERSONAL FAULT WITH A GAME THAT I LOVED IN ALMOST EVERY OTHER WAY, so I shall stop before you start a Hoenn crusade and burn me at the Emerald-Cartridge for questioning the divinity of your Kyogre with perfect IVs. But this topic is not a slaughterhouse, it is a topic to share opinions. If you have a legitimate rebuttal to my boring ass post, post it now, or forever hold your peace.

 

[PDL]

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

let's take it to PMs, k?

No. I don't care at all about this shitty conversation, so drop it.

 

[Lysandre]

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

No. I don't care at all about this shitty conversation, so drop it.

Alright then, we shall drop it, I have stated my "boring ass shitty really pathetic" opinion and you haven't really attempted prove me wrong with opposing points, so we're getting nowhere with this debate anyway. It's one sided, and I can't make you follow my viewpoint any more than you can make me follow yours.

On a slightly less cynical note, I find the bashing of Hoenn's music I'm seeing to be out of line, or at least out of line with my personal tastes... I still whistle the Team Magma battle theme every now and then out of the blue. If we're talking spinoffs here, Colosseum was a great game and was one of few Pokemon games to achieve a truly different feel, and I loved Pinball RS- I still play it for hours on any given plane trip.

For people who dislike the designs of Gen III Pokemon, could you explain why? What felt uncreative or out of place? I find most of them to be refreshing, honestly, and I am truly interested in finding what was so "repetitive" about them.

 

[7487857]

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

Compelling argument, you have there.

You know, if there wasn't a reason for Gen III to be considered the best, this would be it. It got rid of a few annoying fans.

I lol'd at your pitiful argument. You have no reasons. It would be so nice if you could STFU and stop acting lie yuo're opinion is the most superior.

What exactly is there to argue about? Most of the pokemon are bland and unoriginal (I don't care if you add more Pokemon, actually I prefer it, but at least try to make them look half way decent. There's fan-made stuff that's more creative than a "Luvdisc") and most of the sprites for the older Pokemon are atrocious looking. The graphics are hardly an improvement. The new music is terrible. The storyline is weak, same with the region. You can't trade with the previous games. Once again, there's only 8 badges, instead of 16. Contests are introduced, but it's a chore to compete in them, and they are pointless. Wireless communication is added, but you both need an adapter (How convenient!....not), you might as well use a cord instead. Natures are introduced, but as another user pointed out, they only waste your time ("i soft-reset until I got me a Adamant Torchic, lol"), and screws up your stats. I could go on...frankly, the games just bore the hell out of me. I'm sorry, but they do. I don't find them the least bit entertaining.

Yeah, I know, "thats just yer opinion", I know, but don't automatically dismiss people as "gen 1/2 fanboys" just because you can't handle criticism. I'm not obsessed with older games, I could make complaints about generation 1 and 2, but that's not what this thread is about.

 

[Falconwing]

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

Dude, the graphic upgrade from GSC to RSE was amazing.

And luvdisk was no more interesting than saw... Kakuna.

 

[Garren]

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

As I was looking at it, I realized something - the Hoenn Pokemon are actually pretty cool. They have a kind of simple elegance that I think is actually RBY-ish (although this doesn't apply to the legendaries, which are, on the whole, pretty meh)

Personally, one of the reasons I like the Hoenn Pokemon is a lot of them were a bit more abstract and based on some slightly neat ideas, such as sumo wrestlers, mid-eastern yogis, hopskinville goblin, easter island head, ect. Those were my favorite Pokemon of Gen III, although looking back I kind of liked how we got a few Pokemon who were "counterparts" of older Pokemon and I sort of hope Gen V does that to an extent. Come on, give us a new Bat-family to replace Zubat, or maybe a new jellyfish group.

I also sort of like the coloring of them, which I think fits the Hoenn-regions tropical feel. I also suspect that the reason many Gen III Pokemon have somewhat wild color-schemes is because the GBA could display more colors than the GBC. I figure the graphical upgrade may explain why some of the newer Pokemon are a bit more complex as well.

Also, looking it over, Hoenn had a pretty respectable regional dex...you had 202 Pokemon who all could be caught, bar Jirachi and Deoxys, prior to the E4 and their was a decent mix of new and old as well. I also liked how, opposed to the Johto Pokemon in GSC, the new Hoenn Pokemon were allowed to shine a bit more.

Also, on the topic of "RS getting rid of fans", I don't think that's exactly all to blame on the games themself...by 2003 there were a ton of new anime like Yu-Gi-Oh and such garnering attention that it's only natural for Pokemon to lose chunks of its fanbase. It had lost its fad-status at that point as well, but it was still the top selling game on the GBA of all time so it's not like you can say it didn't do well.

 

[7487857]

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

Dude, the graphic upgrade from GSC to RSE was amazing.

From GSC to DPPt, yes. From GSC to RSE, not really. Not in my opinion.

For people who dislike the designs of Gen III Pokemon, could you explain why? What felt uncreative or out of place? I find most of them to be refreshing, honestly, and I am truly interested in finding what was so "repetitive" about them.

You'd have to be blind to think that these are good designs:1, 2, 3, 4, and that's just a very small fraction.

Regi-trio? Seriously? They're rocks with arms and legs. If I want a rock with arms and legs, I'll go catch a Graveler.

 

[Cybersai]

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

You'd have to be blind to think that these are good designs:1, 2, 3,

LOL, what? Pelipper and Ludicolo have great designs. Have you ever seen a pelican in real life?

I loved most of the actual Hoenn Pokemon sans a few.

 

[TM2-Megatron]

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

The graphics are hardly an improvement.

You have a few decent points (unlike your first post), but that's absolute crap. As Ryuutakesh also said, the Gen III graphics were a huge leap over Gen II... just go back and play the damn things on a backlit screen (I'd recommend a second generation, AGS-101 Game Boy Advance SP) and run Emerald on another unit beside it. There's absolutely no contest. If any Generation wasn't much of an improvement, it was going from Gen I to II. Yes, the color made a huge difference, but aside from that the graphics and sprites weren't really any different. Fortunately, back then, colour alone was enough of an advantage for Gen II to stand out.

 

[Falconwing]

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

That's being a little unfair don't you think? a mexican lilypad, a pelican, a demon/goblin/ghost whatever, and a firefly are pretty nifty and at the time unique.

Also...

Spoiler

That seems like a major improvement to me.

 

[Olaf-symbiote]

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

This post is gonna be very controversial and many of you will likely disagree but since it's my honest opinion, I wanna present it to you all, whether or not you like it:

I've realized it's not just RSE I have issues with, I actually think Nintendo in general was a bit meh during the GBA/Gamecube era. The countless ports of old SNES and NES games for GBA instead a bunch of truly new ideas (I'm looking at you, Super Mario Advance 1-4, A Link to the Past, Classic NES game range, Donkey Kong Countries and many others), RSE, dropping the ball with their main franchises on Gamecube with games like Super Mario Sunshine (do I even need to tell?), Zelda: Wind Waker (IMO, the game strayed too far from the series' traditions and core mechanics), Mario Kart: Double Dash (with gimmicky "two drivers in one car" system and making the karts too big, heavy, slow and clunky), too many Mario Parties and Mario Sports games, Donkey Konga instead of a true Donkey Kong platformer, the Starfox series' fall to shame with its sub-par Gamecube entries, Wario World (incredibly boring and short), Gamecube's Pokémon games, only Kirby Air Ride instead of a true platformer, killing off the first party support for Gamecube like two years before the launch of Wii and the slow release of AAA Gamecube titles.

Of course there were kickass games like SSB Melee, Paper Mario: TTYD, Metroid Primes 1-2, Pikmin 1-2 and Luigi's Mansion, but all of the issues I listed made the Gamecube/GBA era the least favorite Nintendo era for me. I had started with N64 and GBC and was continually wowed by games like Super Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Red/Blue/Yellow, Gold/Silver/Crystal, Wario Land 2, Banjos, Donkey 64, Starfox 64 and others that I played for countless and countless hours and enjoyed immensively. Then come Gamecube and GBA and suddenly I'm underwhelmed by the Big N's newest efforts. It just felt for me like they were starting to lose their touch and were unable to make games that would rival their best efforts (Sunshine is a joke compared to SM64!). Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald didn't make me feel any better, rather they confirmed my fears of Nintendo's biggest franchises falling out of line. I had always been a Nintendo fanboy so changing to the rivals' consoles was out of question for me. I just kept hoping Nintendo would finally pick up the pace and become more like their older selves.

With their newest consoles and games like Galaxy, Twilight Princess, Brawl and Pokémon generation IV I can say they've definitely improved tremendeously and I'm finally being wowed by the big N once again. I'm certainly glad were past that dark era when Nintendo failed to impress me, unlike they usually do.

 

[Ranger Jack Walker]

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

Graphics were vastly improved from GSC to RSE. Naturally occuring weather being excellent examples. You cn see your reflection in the water. I don't think the previous games had that. Also, the Secret bases were great. And theres the box system. The Box system in RSE was 10 times better than the one in GSC which was the same as the one in RBY(I think).

While Graphics improvement from RSE to DPPt were much more, the change from GSC to RSE was also overwhelming.

 

[TM2-Megatron]

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

This post is gonna be very controversial and many of you will likely disagree but since it's my honest opinion, I wanna present it to you all, whether or not you like it:

I've realized it's not just RSE I have issues with, I actually think Nintendo in general was a bit meh during the GBA/Gamecube era. The countless ports of old SNES and NES games for GBA instead a bunch of truly new ideas (I'm looking at you, Super Mario Advance 1-4, A Link to the Past, Classic NES game range, Donkey Kong Countries and many others), RSE, dropping the ball with their main franchises on Gamecube with games like Super Mario Sunshine (do I even need to tell?), Zelda: Wind Waker (IMO, the game strayed too far from the series' traditions and core mechanics), Mario Kart: Double Dash (with gimmicky "two drivers in one car" system and making the karts too big, heavy, slow and clunky), too many Mario Parties and Mario Sports games, Donkey Konga instead of a true Donkey Kong platformer, the Starfox series' fall to shame with its sub-par Gamecube entries, Wario World (incredibly boring and short), Gamecube's Pokémon games, only Kirby Air Ride instead of a true platformer, killing off the first party support for Gamecube like two years before the launch of Wii and the slow release of AAA Gamecube titles.

Of course there were kickass games like SSB Melee, Paper Mario: TTYD, Metroid Primes 1-2, Pikmin 1-2 and Luigi's Mansion, but all of the issues I listed made the Gamecube/GBA era the least favorite Nintendo era for me. I had started with N64 and GBC and was continually wowed by games like Super Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Red/Blue/Yellow, Gold/Silver/Crystal, Wario Land 2, Banjos, Donkey 64, Starfox 64 and others that I played for countless and countless hours and enjoyed immensively. Then come Gamecube and GBA and suddenly I'm underwhelmed by the Big N's newest efforts. It just felt for me like they were starting to lose their touch and were unable to make games that would rival their best efforts (Sunshine is a joke compared to SM64!). Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald didn't make me feel any better, rather they confirmed my fears of Nintendo's biggest franchises falling out of line. I had always been a Nintendo fanboy so changing to the rivals' consoles was out of question for me. I just kept hoping Nintendo would finally pick up the pace and become more like their older selves.

With their newest consoles and games like Galaxy, Twilight Princess, Brawl and Pokémon generation IV I can say they've definitely improved tremendeously and I'm finally being wowed by the big N once again. I'm certainly glad were past that dark era when Nintendo failed to impress me, unlike they usually do.

1. Wind Waker was an awesome game... different, to be sure, but no less awesome because of it. Better those graphics, IMO, than the clunky "realistic" (but really much more unrealistic and hideous) style of all the previous 3-D Zelda games. I'd rather have seen Nintendo wait for those kind of 3-D visuals until their consoles actually had the processing power to render them without looking all polygony :disgust:.

2. Super Mario Sunshine was, again, a departure. But eventually I really managed to get into it. The environment was a bit of a fun change from the norm, and all those tropical ambient sounds were great to sit back and listen to in the middle of a miserable Canadian winter. It also helped that the graphics were so far in advance of Mario 64's clunky visuals.

3. Mario Golf, at any rate, was a fun Mario Sports title. A Wii version would be a hell of a lot of fun, given the motion control... I'm kinda pissed we haven't gotten this.

4. Yeah, Super Mario Advance 1-4 was a bit odd... and essentially prevented us from getting an original Mario title for the GBA. However, look at it this way. Thanks to the Super Mario Advance line of games, we now can play pretty much every Mario platformer from the NES to N64 on portable systems. These are some of the most fun and engaging games in history, and I marvel at the fact I can now carry around every game I played on the televison from the late 80s through mid 90s. I'm anticipating a port of Mario Sunshine for the 3DS, to continue that trend.

** I'm counting Super Mario Bros. DX for the GBC, since the NES Series GBA titles were absolute crap... Mario Bros. DX was one of the most marvelous ports ever made. ***

And theres the box system. The Box system in RSE was 10 times better than the one in GSC which was the same as the one in RBY(I think).

Technically, FireRed/LeafGreen and Emerald perfected Gen III's Box system. In Ruby/Sapphire, there was no "Move Items" feature, and you couldn't select more than one Pokemon at a time. It was less clunky due to the visual interface, but it wasn't until the remakes and 3rd version of Gen III that the Box System became what we know today.

 

[Garren]

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

Oh yeah, the Box System.

Loved how they gave all the Pokemon their own team-screen sprite as well instead of the generic avatars they used in the previous games. I do hope they upgrade those in BW though.