• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

364Sealeo.png

349Feebas.png

These are the most blantant examples of Gen 1 rip offs I can find. But there is also less obvious ones like the other Crawdaunt and the snake that hated Zangoose
What this is saying to me that after there is a Pokemon based after a certain animal, that animal cannot be Pokemon-ized ever again. "We already did a seal-type thing! We can't do those ever again!" If you're trying to compare the Spheal line to the Seel line, that's a bit of stretch...White seals =/= blue walruses. As for Feebas, it's a nice female-esque counterpart to Gyarados. And for Seviper...Yeah, so he and Arbok are just both snakes. I see nothing "rip off"-y about this.

With that logic, you should also dislike Heracross, because it's a beetle-based Pokemon with high attack like Pinsir, Miltank because she's just a girl's Tauros, Turtwig because it's the lovechild of Squirtle and Bulbasaur, Pachirisu because he's just Pikachu's squirrel brother, Finneon because it's a prettier Remoraid...I could really go on and on.

Hope I haven't offended, but this is one of those anti-gen III arguments I'm just not getting.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

The third Generation was great, and Ruby being my first actual game (I had played Blue along with a few others before but none were actually mine) I found it quite fun and entertaining.

I am glad to see that someone has brought light to this as it seems most people just brush off the third generation as being a flop because it went to a different method of approaching the games, but I really think it did a wonderful job.

One of the things that I miss from the Generation III games is the ability to go underwater with Dive which was absolutely fun and you could catch Pokemon in the seaweed which I found quite amusing.

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.

That seems like a major improvement to me.
Sableye is a ghostly anonymity is how I would categorize it. Where is the old man that lies in the middle of the road though, he was a nuisance and deserves to be placed on that map!
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

pointless locations like the Mossdeep Space Centre (had no ingame relevance at all)


Only in saphire, in emerald and ruby, it has a pretty important role, Team Magma try to take rocket fuel to make mt. Chimney erupt, they left that out in sapphire,, indicating version exclusive storylines not found in any other games, and thats what makes Hoenn unique and fun to play.

I loved diving, that was so unoriginal, the only 2 downsides I can think of is the fact you go too damn slow, and that wild pokemon hardly ever appear. (Strangly enough though, on both of my emerald playthroughs, the first wild pokemon I encounterd underwater was Relicanth :D)

EDIT: Linking back to one post, the Spheal line is not a rip-off of the seel line, first, THEIR WALRUSES! Really, when did walrein look like a seal? And the Feebas line, it's not a rip off, it's a counterpart, theres not a law against making a counterpart 2 generations after the original pokemon!
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

I didn't like it since they tried to make the gameplay too much like the anime and that just messed stuff up.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

I love 3rd gen. They really stood on their own and were really good games.

Though I think I have another theory for the fandom dropping other than the usual they're bad ect ect.

Two of my friends didn't buy 3rd gen. It wasn't because the games were bad. They really wanted the games and actually admitted when having a go on mine they really enjoyed them.

You know what the problem was. Gen 3 was the first gen to be on a different system.

Pokemon RBY were on the original black and white gameboy that had a extremely large fanbase.

Pokemon GS while being for GBC also played on the original black and white gameboy hence still having a large fanbase.

My friends had the original Black and white gameboy.

When Crystal came out any drop wouldn't have been that noticeable because 3rd version usually don't sell as well as the first 2 anyway. However I can say honestly that due to that being exclusive to the GBC that I was the only one of the group I was with who bought the game.

Though crystal being the 3rd wouldn't have really made a impact and anyone who had stadium would still be able to play crystal with the transfer pack.

However RS came out on the GBA.

I had 3 friends who played Pokemon RBY and GS on the original gameboy. Only 1 of them upgraded.

As soon as I said it was on the GBA the other 2 were like I'd rather stick to the old system because they didn't want to spend money on a new gameboy. Believe or not they still haven't bought a new system up to this day. Too much money to collect systems.

One thing a game company risks when updating a game system is their fanbase. When a system gets upgraded there's no guarantee that everyone will upgrade to the new system.

Practically they had a huge fanbase on the original black and white gameboy that they built up for many many years. When they finally did the full jump from gameboy to GBA and had it so the GBA game could not under any circumastances play on a GBC or a black and white gameboy they essentially left behind some of the fanbase. This also means RS takes a hit.

The GBA was big risk jump in the portable market considering while they did upgrade to GBC from black and white and had a few exclusives there were still also GBCgames being developed to play on both. Almost like being safe.

GBA wasn't being safe. They literally just abandoned the GBC and GB software entirely which also meant no link cable for GBC to GBA connectability. Pokemon was effected by this decision by Nintendo but not just Pokemon. I have a robopon game on GBA and GBC. They cannot connect with one another and the developer made a story to make up an excuse for why the heroe in the sequal on GBA has no access to his old Robopon.

Nintendo screwed over alot of developers and even fans.

Unfortunately while there were some who upgraded, there were other people who were comfortable with their old brick gameboys and just didn't bother upgrading.

That can effect a fandom pretty heavily considering the changes.
That on top some of the fans not liking 3rd gen and the contiued drop in the fad which started around middle to end of 2nd gen.
 
Last edited:
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

That is a main mistake that they made when they had the switchover from the Gameboy Color to the Gameboy Advance for all these new games. They really should have tried to make the two somewhat compatible so people didn't lose all this hard earned work that they spent time to do.

I know a few people that feel kind of like they lost out since they found a shiny in the original Game Boy Color games and can't transfer them over. It really would have been nice if they created some sort of device to do this with even if it meant a very long and hard to figure out method like the time-capsule, in the end it would have been worth it.

I don't remember the part where Team Magma stole Rocket Fuel from the Mossdeep Space Center in the first two games but in Emerald Version it was implemented for Team Magma to take over the center. I think it was also a link to Deoxys as it is the Space Pokemon and was introduced in these games. I still can't believe people thought that they could go to the moon or space, I just found that funny.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Gen III was a much needed new direction.
Playing HGSS now.. kanto is fun at first but, johto is short,and kanto feels a little bit... empty to me. I love the games though.

I liked and disliked some parts of it, the new pokemon were awesome,although some were based on, or were a perfected version of(salamencecough) older pokemon. I loved the locations though, can kanto beat, a desert,a volcano, underwater diving, and some more things?No.
I also really liked Hoenns music, although it all sounded a little bit similair to me.

There are minus points though, the new in-depth features, such as natures, can become tedious in-game, and backfire on you.

It is subjective though. But the people who claim gen III is oblivously inferior don't sound right to me. Gen III sacrificed some stuff, but gained many things.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

I agree with the article. Hoenn has always been my favourite region. I even heard someone once say that they hated gen III because of the pokécenter music, I mean wtf.

Also gen III had the best replay value in my opinion, because of the secret base battles (I had like 16 friends' secret bases, so that was awesome).
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

That is a main mistake that they made when they had the switchover from the Gameboy Color to the Gameboy Advance for all these new games. They really should have tried to make the two somewhat compatible so people didn't lose all this hard earned work that they spent time to do.

I know a few people that feel kind of like they lost out since they found a shiny in the original Game Boy Color games and can't transfer them over. It really would have been nice if they created some sort of device to do this with even if it meant a very long and hard to figure out method like the time-capsule, in the end it would have been worth it.

Honestly, while the incompatability was an inconvienince, to be frank, it turned out for the better because it allowed Game Freak/Nintendo to work out a far better coding system for the Pokémon data and the game data in general. It also worked out for the better because it presented a challenge: You couldn't just trade your Lvl 100 monsters from your older games and sweep the newer ones in a quarter of the time.

Would you rather have incredibily buggy game-coding and having gender/shininess be determined by IVs alone? Do you want to use monsters that have maxmimum IVs of only 15 against monsters that can have double that?

Also, while it's possible for a 16-bit character to exist on a 32-bit "enviroment", it's impossible for the opposite. Thus your Time-capsule idea would be impossible.

As for whining about how hard it is to get correct natures/gender/abilties/IVs and what not, that really should only matter when you are facing off against other people. EVs and IVs don't really matter a whole lot ingame, and the game offers you ways of increasing your chances of getting the Pokémon you need (At least from Emerald on anyway... make very good use of Synchronize people...). Anyway, as I mentioned before, IVs have existed since Gen I so claiming that Gen III sucked because of them is retarded since all it really amounts to is how ignorant you are of the game system.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

I do not agree with this. Gen III almost killed my interest in Pokemon...

I can say a similar thing, only for Gen II.

Thank you for writing this. A previous Bulbanews article stating how "Gold and Silver were the best games in the series" left a bad taste in my mouth, and I'm glad others felt the same way. HeartGold and SoulSilver saved Johto for me. Before them, I had little love for the region. Gold and Silver were the only two main series Pokemon games that I disliked, with Crystal saving them slightly by adding the female player character and a few extra touches.

You hit it on the nose when describing the Johto region: cramped. There was little exploring to do, even throughout routes 40 and 41, and trees constantly surrounding you felt almost suffocating. Kanto was similarly built but honestly not quite as bad as Johto. Hoenn was amazing for exploration however. The areas were big, you weren't constantly surrounded by trees, the caves/mountainy areas were interesting, and the watery routes were actually enjoyable due to the addition of the Dive HM. Pacifidlog Town, while a bit pointless, was an interesting concept for a town, as was Sootopolis City. Fortree is also a very lovely place conceptually, and I can't wait to see how they'd treat it in a remake. Summed up, Hoenn actually felt like a fresh, unique and complete region, while Johto felt tiny, cramped, and relied too much on Kanto to give players a proper gaming experience. While I appreciate Kanto in HG/SS much more than I did in G/S, I'll still forever see it as a tag-on that dwarfed the Johto region from what it could have been.

One thing I actually disagree with in this article is the Pokemon comment. People love to bash the Generation III and IV Pokemon while praising Generation 2's... and I must ask, why? I failed to see what was so incredible about the new Pokemon when G/S were first released, and I still fail to see it now when looking at my Hoenn and Sinnoh collections. Gen IV has been criticized for having "too many unnecessary evolutions" when baby Pokemon plagued Gen II. Baby Pokemon were an interesting addition, yes, but they were still not new lines... which is another thing Gen IV has been criticized for. Funny that. To me, every generation had its awesome Pokemon, its so-so Pokemon, and the throwaways that the majority of players ignore. This was no different in Gen II, III, or IV, and if Generation I were to come out now we'd be seeing the exact same thing happen with it too.

I think what it all comes down to is that final sentence of the second last paragraph. None of the generations, minus Gen I for obvious reasons, have been "revolutions". Every generation has been an evolution of the last, taking from the previous Gen while adding a bit more and trying new things. I think the greatest flaw Gen 3 made when moving from Gen 2 was the lack of Morning/Day/Night, but other than that it had just as many unique features to make them worthwhile. I love the strategies of Double Battles, the increased customization of Natures and Abilities, Secret Bases, the Dive HM, breeding additions Emerald brought with it, and the Battle Frontier. I also adored FR/LG for making the upgraded Elite 4, a concept which was put to wonderful use in Platinum and HG/SS. Maybe those additions weren't as spectacular as the addition of two types, breeding, or the type split, but they still played highly important roles in evolving the series - and I appreciate them for it.

The way I see it, each Gen is better than the next, which is why 4th Gen is currently the best Generation, and Platinum/HG/SS - while remakes/spin-offs - are the best games. Chances are Black and White will take that title once they're finally released, too.
 
Last edited:
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

I agree with the article. Hoenn has always been my favourite region. I even heard someone once say that they hated gen III because of the pokécenter music, I mean wtf.

Also gen III had the best replay value in my opinion, because of the secret base battles (I had like 16 friends' secret bases, so that was awesome).

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

Its good that people weren't able to bring their old pokemon to RSE. Firstly, they would require no effort to complete game. Take into account that Pokemon games aren't too hard anyway. Secondly, people would then have ignored the newly inroduced Pokemon.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

I'm one of the group who hate gen III. :p
IMO gen iii only has fucked pokémons, fucked graphics, fucked gyms, fucked plot etc etc.
and i hate game boy advance.
don't pretending to offend anyone ehehe but i rly hate gen III. D:
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Only in saphire, in emerald and ruby, it has a pretty important role, Team Magma try to take rocket fuel to make mt. Chimney erupt, they left that out in sapphire,, indicating version exclusive storylines not found in any other games, and thats what makes Hoenn unique and fun to play.

I enjoyed Sapphire version (and later, a borrowed Emerald), because they were a) the first Pokemon games I had played in a long time (my Gold's game-save battery died, and as an eight-year old, i had no idea how to replace it), and b) were so refreshing. I mean, I guess I'm part of the odd minority here, but I liked Generation III.

Ruby, Sapphire, and Emerald introduced us to a whole new region that was pretty cool. Mt. Chimney, Sootopolis, the Diving regions, Mt. Pyre, etc. were all simply amazingly detailed locations with a lot of flavor that previous versions lacked immensely. Each one was unique. Yeah, there were some major misses - the Space Center was a useless piece of shit in Sapphire that had no meaning, and could have been used by Aqua for the opposite purposes of Magma - but I still loved it.

The Pokemon were extremely unique and interesting as well. I'll agree with 'haters' on the Feebas vs Magikarp thing, but those two were still radically different: Feebas was super-rare, Magikarp could be found literally everywhere; Feebas evolved by a maxed-out Beauty stat (something which was incredibly unique and helped provide an incentive to get into the Pokeblocks and Contest system), Magikarp evolved at level 20; Milotic was the legendary bringer of peace during distress, Gyarados brought destruction. Of course they were similar....they were complements!

To claim that somehow because one type of animal was used in one Generation, it shouldn't be used in another is kind of self-defeating. Pokemon such as Plusle and Minun were intended to evoke the image of Pikachu, but in a completely different manner; now instead of being the electrically-charged traveling companion of Ash, the electric mice of Generation III helped showcase a new feature: tag battling. This is the same with Feebas and Magikarp (which I pointed out earlier), and almost every other case of new Pokemon.

Furthermore, Hoenn introduced several crazy new concepts that have set the stage in Generation IV. I'm talking about the Nincada/Ninjask/Shedinja thing (which was pretty damn sweet, not gonna lie); the Diving; a truly overarching mythology that wasn't simply a side-plot. The rival for the first time wasn't a completely insufferable douchebag. There was an actually helpful character instead of a sea of antagonists.

To claim, then, that somehow Generation III ruined the franchise when the concepts it introduced have basically formed the basis for the revolutionary Generation IV and (hopefully) Generation V...
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

I'm one of the group who hate gen III. :p
IMO gen iii only has fucked pokémons, fucked graphics, fucked gyms, fucked plot etc etc.
and i hate game boy advance.
don't pretending to offend anyone ehehe but i rly hate gen III. D:

This post makes you look like a retard. Get out.

No really, the fact that this sort of posting undermines anyone who may otherwise share this viewpoint.

If you can't post properly, don't post.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Gen III had awesome graphics. I liked the shading for the Pokemon sprites better than D/P.

Platinum and HgSs is weird sometimes with colouring like Quagsire or Sudowoodo's back sprite.
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.

Flaw in that logic because:

1. Wifi battling didn't exist in Gen III, so trying to get the highest IV's, the right nature and EV training was hardly a priority in this game as much as it was in the previous ones.

2. This sentence: "Whoops sorry your Steelix has weak base stats against the other guy with your exact same moveset sorry you lose". Cynthia had max IV Pokemon, you didn't. Bit of an overstatement don't you think?

3. This sentence : "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." Pokemon is like chess in that it is a strategy game, but at the same time they are supposed to be actual creatures that you are supposed to connect with. You're problem if you throw away Pokemon that are "genetically" inferior. Not my problem you missed Game Freak's preachy "it doesn't matter if Pokemon are strong or weak" stuff.

Honestly, none of this is Gen III's fault. It's about caring for IVs and EV's during your initial play through of the game. I've seen people saying they're trying to get the right natures, high IVs and EV train for the Pokemon league in Gen IV! Of course you're not going to have fun doing that while you play the game.

I'll be honest, I've played all my games long past their expiry date, all except Pearl and Platinum. You know why? It's not because Gen IV sucked, its because I focused on natures and stats while trying to play through the game. So now, I've gone back to the way I've played the games in Gen I, II, and III when I picked up HeartGold, and it felt awesome.

I'm not saying that training for competitive battle is bad, go ahead do it, but do it after the game is over when you have the entire game's resources at your disposal.

Honestly, I don't understand why you were so selfconcious about that when wifi battling didn't exist in Gen III and the competitive scene would just be on online simulators like NetBattle. Seriously, if there's a generation that you should attribute hatred to due to IV's, EV's and natures, it should be Gen IV because that's when training Pokemon in your games actually mattered. Apart from random tournaments that most of us never went to, there was no need to train your Pokemon to such an extent.

"Can ny1 breed me a hastee poochena?"

?_?

How does that work out when there was no online trading in Gen III? So much for trying to mock people who forced this competitiveness in the fandom when you just failed logic 101.

I fully understand that people can just hate the Pokemon and the region and I accept that. I even accept if they say it sucks, its just their opinion, but please, if you're going to try and back it up, at least do it right.
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?

Irony is that people always bitch about how easy the Elite 4 is, yet given a wittle challenge, people pee their pants and run home crying. There is this fun little thing called level grinding. Certainly much easier than waiting to get perfect IV's. Or you know, being better than then AI.

Also how is it Gen III's fault that Cynthia, a Gen IV champion maximized the hidden values introduced in Gen I?

All I'm hearing is "I actually hate Gen IV's fandom but not the games themselves! However I don't want to admit it and instead I'll blame Gen III, the generation I didn't like very much in the first place"
 
Last edited:
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Obviously, these fans are so helpless, they ARE forced to do EVERYTHING in the game! D8 Oh no!
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Also, if you don't want your opinion invalidated, then don't post them. People have every right to post their counter opinions, though I will admit I was being a bit harsh on my post.

Honestly though? I don't care. If you're going to place hatred on a generation for something other generations did, and you can't see the flaw in that, or you see it and don't care, then I don't care about playing nice.

I honestly don't care if your only argument is "I thought it sucked". Go ahead, you thought it did, but don't act like its a universal opinion or pull out bullshit logic.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Also how is it Gen III's fault that Cynthia, a Gen IV champion maximized the hidden values introduced in Gen I?

Were Cynthia's Pokemon fully EV trained, as well (I'm guessing not, though, as that would've made her practically unstoppable)? I didn't have that much trouble with her, although I made sure I was at a significantly higher level than the E4 before I took them on.

You can't argue that Gen III didn't completely overhaul the stats, though, regardless of the fact IVs technically existed in Gen I/II. Although most of the online community (such as it was, back then) called them DVs at that time, as I recall. Back then there was only the IVs/DVs, and stat experience.
 
Re: Generation III: Criticized too often?: Fan's response in defense of Generation II

Were Cynthia's Pokemon fully EV trained, as well (I'm guessing not, though, as that would've made her practically unstoppable)? I didn't have that much trouble with her, although I made sure I was at a significantly higher level than the E4 before I took them on.

You can't argue that Gen III didn't completely overhaul the stats, though, regardless of the fact IVs technically existed in Gen I/II. Although most of the online community (such as it was, back then) called them DVs at that time, as I recall. Back then there was only the IVs/DVs, and stat experience.

All of Cynthia's Pokemon had 31 IVs in all stats and were EV trained.

IIRC some hackers found out all about it...and it isn't hard to do if you have a Action Replay.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom