• 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 IV Remake Speculation

Will there be remakes in Gen VIII?


  • Total voters
    263
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think if Dialga and Palkia are getting megas/primals then Giratina Origin form might be altered to give it increased BST. Either that or Giratina gains a mega/primal with the other two, Of course the remakes probably won't be around until the next game system.
 
With the world going absolutely port and remake mad and with the Pokémon franchise itself having released remakes in the past (FireRed/LeafGreen and HeartGold/SoulSilver), demand has obviously kicked up for other games in the series' history to be remade for modern platforms and fans. In the past, we have had a single Remake Discussion thread, but as calls continue and continue, sometimes it's better to neaten things up. This is why we're starting a couple of new threads - this one for the discussion of possible remakes of Generation IV games, as well as a separate on for Generation III. The house-rules are the same as the last thread, but with a couple of new additions:

- Respect other users and their opinion, do not participate in flamewars, and keep discussions civil.
- Comments that merely state whether or not one wants remakes are considered spam.
- For the purpose of the discussion, discussion on the validity of remakes or which ones should be prioritised over others is a no-no. Assume that all remakes are going to happen and discuss what new features you would like to see et cetera.
- Discussion of remakes of games from Generation III (Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald/FireRed/LeafGreen) and Generation V (Black/White) are a no-no. There is a separate thread for the former and the latter is just silliness.
- Do not address rulebreakers yourself. Report them and let us moderators deal with it.

Now, play safe, have fun and remember to always wear a helmet, as they'll keep you safe. Failure to comply with these rules will result in spam, or potentially flaming/trolling infractions. Repeated offenders will be dealt with severely.
I'd LOVE to see a 3d Remake of Sinnoh; I bet it'd be Called TimeDiamond and SpacePearl!!!! ^_^
 
I'd like if they threw a curveball and did one game and called it a Platinum remake. I campaigned that we should've gotten an Emerald remake and a Yellow remake instead of ORAS because that would be too obvious yet they went with obvious... I'd hope they mix it up from paired remakes.
 
I'd like if they threw a curveball and did one game and called it a Platinum remake. I campaigned that we should've gotten an Emerald remake and a Yellow remake instead of ORAS because that would be too obvious yet they went with obvious... I'd hope they mix it up from paired remakes.
Unlikely since two games make more money than one. They can put Platinum content into DP remakes.
 
Unlikely since two games make more money than one. They can put Platinum content into DP remakes.

Well duh, but if they make one game instead of two there's room for potentially other games in the same generation. Like I said about Gen VI, if we had to get four games, I'd have preferred Kanto and Hoenn split into one game each instead having two for Hoenn. In the end there's still four games which means they'll make about the same amount of money so your argument is invalid.
 
Well duh, but if they make one game instead of two there's room for potentially other games in the same generation. Like I said about Gen VI, if we had to get four games, I'd have preferred Kanto and Hoenn split into one game each instead having two for Hoenn. In the end there's still four games which means they'll make about the same amount of money so your argument is invalid.
Actually it is not. I don't see them putting two regions into one game again. We haven't had a third version since Platinum. I think it is safe to say that we are sticking to paired games now.
 
Actually it is not. I don't see them putting two regions into one game again. We haven't had a third version since Platinum. I think it is safe to say that we are sticking to paired games now.

That's exactly what they want you to think. Remember the whole "we want to be unpredictable" thing? Now that they have everybody thinking they've established a new pattern away from third versions, they could be like "hey look a third version". Also, I wouldn't consider standalone remakes to be "third versions", they're more like, as I said, standalone versions. Remakes of third versions honestly makes the most sense because they had the most content, as we saw with ORAS, a lot of elements from Emerald were left out, most notably the Battle Frontier. This is why my idea of a perfect Gen VI had a Yellow remake which would technically be a FRLG remake but with Yellow features, and an Emerald remake, unfortunately we got Pokemon Origins and ORAS instead.

On the topic of the Sinnoh region, I had to look back through some old pages on bulbapedia to refresh my memory because my memory if the region is hazy, I haven't played a Sinnoh game in years even though I own all three, but looking back now, it was an awesome region, it's huge, I think it's bigger than Kanto and Johto combined, Sinnoh has 18 cities and 30 routes, Johto has 10 cities and 20 routes, also, Johto's population is 452 in HGSS vs. Sinnoh's 755 in Platinum. Kanto's population in HGSS is 364. Kanto and Johto combined outnumber Sinnoh by only 61.

Sinnoh is, looking back on my childhood days of grinding Diamond and then Platinum, one of my most memorable regions, next to Hoenn of course. I think it is for this reason alone that they'll eventually give us the Sinnoh remakes we want, to satisfy the nostalgia of those who played through it so much. There is a problem with this idea though. One could say that Hoenn remakes became necessary once the DS family of systems lost the GBA slot, but we can still play Gen IV on the 3DS, it is for this reason I think they might skip remakes again, as they did in Gen V, which was also the second generation on a system, much like Gen VII will be, but Gen VIII will be on a new system and bring with it Sinnoh remakes. However, in the absense of Sinnoh remakes and while remaining on the 3DS, it makes sense to give us Kanto remakes simply due to the fact that Kanto was in Gen III along with Hoenn, which got it's remake on the 3DS.

Essentially, I think they're splitting the job of remaking both Gen III's paired games and its own set of remakes (FRLG) into two generations instead of my idea where they cram it all into Gen VI. I also feel like there's no excuse to leave Johto out at this point when it could easily fit on a cartridge with Kanto, which is why I think ultimately they won't do RBY/FRLG remakes but rather sequels. If they do remakes of Gen I's story, they'll make a much more vast post-game that involves a pre-Gen II Johto of some form. Red ends up on Mt. Silver, I'd like if they explored the story inbetween him becoming the champion and him ending up there.
 
Well duh, but if they make one game instead of two there's room for potentially other games in the same generation. Like I said about Gen VI, if we had to get four games, I'd have preferred Kanto and Hoenn split into one game each instead having two for Hoenn. In the end there's still four games which means they'll make about the same amount of money so your argument is invalid.
There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THEY'D O-N-L-Y MAKE 1 GAME; THE REASON THEY OFTEN MAKE 2, IS TO MAKE MORE MONEY; THE CHOICE OF 2 GAMES, MEANS DOUBLE THE MONEY OF THE PROFIT MADE FROM THE 1 SINGLE GAME!!!!!

P.S. I'm not yelling, I often type in All caps out of habit.
 
I seriously doubt making 2 almost identical games will double the sales.
 
Remakes of third versions honestly makes the most sense because they had the most content, as we saw with ORAS, a lot of elements from Emerald were left out, most notably the Battle Frontier.

I understand that remakes of third versions make more sense for the people who played those third versions (for instance, I only played Emerald, never RS). But a lot of casual players have never played Emerald, only RS.

For example nearly 3 times more people played RS, than those who played Emerald.

So, Game Freak announcing RS remakes, is going to make nearly 3 times more hype than if they made an Emerald remake. Most notably among casual players. Those would have played RS back in the day, but more likely not Emerald.

It really makes a lot more sense to make Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire, rather than Delta Emerald. Especially if your goal is to attract nostalgic fans.

Content wise, yes, there is a fair bit of Emerald content missing from ORAS, mainly the Battle Frontier, of course. But there is also a fair bit of Emerald content that was nicely included in ORAS, even though Masuda has stated that ORAS is specifically a RS remake (with Emerald enhancements) because RS was such a special project for him on a personal level.

Also, two games will usually make more money than one game. Not twice as much money but still a good amount more.
 
Last edited:
That's exactly what they want you to think. Remember the whole "we want to be unpredictable" thing? Now that they have everybody thinking they've established a new pattern away from third versions, they could be like "hey look a third version". Also, I wouldn't consider standalone remakes to be "third versions", they're more like, as I said, standalone versions. Remakes of third versions honestly makes the most sense because they had the most content, as we saw with ORAS, a lot of elements from Emerald were left out, most notably the Battle Frontier. This is why my idea of a perfect Gen VI had a Yellow remake which would technically be a FRLG remake but with Yellow features, and an Emerald remake, unfortunately we got Pokemon Origins and ORAS instead.

On the topic of the Sinnoh region, I had to look back through some old pages on bulbapedia to refresh my memory because my memory if the region is hazy, I haven't played a Sinnoh game in years even though I own all three, but looking back now, it was an awesome region, it's huge, I think it's bigger than Kanto and Johto combined, Sinnoh has 18 cities and 30 routes, Johto has 10 cities and 20 routes, also, Johto's population is 452 in HGSS vs. Sinnoh's 755 in Platinum. Kanto's population in HGSS is 364. Kanto and Johto combined outnumber Sinnoh by only 61.

Sinnoh is, looking back on my childhood days of grinding Diamond and then Platinum, one of my most memorable regions, next to Hoenn of course. I think it is for this reason alone that they'll eventually give us the Sinnoh remakes we want, to satisfy the nostalgia of those who played through it so much. There is a problem with this idea though. One could say that Hoenn remakes became necessary once the DS family of systems lost the GBA slot, but we can still play Gen IV on the 3DS, it is for this reason I think they might skip remakes again, as they did in Gen V, which was also the second generation on a system, much like Gen VII will be, but Gen VIII will be on a new system and bring with it Sinnoh remakes. However, in the absense of Sinnoh remakes and while remaining on the 3DS, it makes sense to give us Kanto remakes simply due to the fact that Kanto was in Gen III along with Hoenn, which got it's remake on the 3DS.

Essentially, I think they're splitting the job of remaking both Gen III's paired games and its own set of remakes (FRLG) into two generations instead of my idea where they cram it all into Gen VI. I also feel like there's no excuse to leave Johto out at this point when it could easily fit on a cartridge with Kanto, which is why I think ultimately they won't do RBY/FRLG remakes but rather sequels. If they do remakes of Gen I's story, they'll make a much more vast post-game that involves a pre-Gen II Johto of some form. Red ends up on Mt. Silver, I'd like if they explored the story inbetween him becoming the champion and him ending up there.
They are likely making remakes of DP over Kanto. They can just add third game content into DP remakes like they did with ORAS and HGSS. I get the whole unpredictability thing but I am pretty sure they are not returning to third version games or remaking a third version games. Kanto would not be remade again because it has already been remade, appeared in 4 gens in a row and is released on virtual console. DP remakes would be made over Platinum remake.
 
I think the reveal of regional forms could be a game changer for remakes. I could see future remakes adding new forms of existing Pokemon as a way to fix variety issues in the region. It's just a shame they didn't start doing this until now because the regions that already got remakes have many more variety issues than the ones that haven't, Kanto, Johto, and Hoenn could use more Pokemon in several types whereas Sinnoh, Unova, and Kalos (and probably Alola as well) have little to no variety issues. But there's still a few things they could do for the Sinnoh remakes, even with Platinum's enhancements there's only 2 Dragon types and 5 Fire types, so adding in some Sinnoh Forms of those types would really help round things out.

Essentially, I think they're splitting the job of remaking both Gen III's paired games and its own set of remakes (FRLG) into two generations instead of my idea where they cram it all into Gen VI. I also feel like there's no excuse to leave Johto out at this point when it could easily fit on a cartridge with Kanto, which is why I think ultimately they won't do RBY/FRLG remakes but rather sequels. If they do remakes of Gen I's story, they'll make a much more vast post-game that involves a pre-Gen II Johto of some form. Red ends up on Mt. Silver, I'd like if they explored the story inbetween him becoming the champion and him ending up there.

I think Kanto and Johto would benefit more from separate remakes than lumping them together again. They would have a lot more leeway to add more content that way and give the regions their own identities.

I understand that remakes of third versions make more sense for the people who played those third versions (for instance, I only played Emerald, never RS). But a lot of casual players have never played Emerald, only RS.

For example nearly 3 times more people played RS, than those who played Emerald.

So, Game Freak announcing RS remakes, is going to make nearly 3 times more hype than if they made an Emerald remake. Most notably among casual players. Those would have played RS back in the day, but more likely not Emerald.

It really makes a lot more sense to make Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire, rather than Delta Emerald. Especially if your goal is to attract nostalgic fans.

Content wise, yes, there is a fair bit of Emerald content missing from ORAS, mainly the Battle Frontier, of course. But there is also a fair bit of Emerald content that was nicely included in ORAS, even though Masuda has stated that ORAS is specifically a RS remake (with Emerald enhancements) because RS was such a special project for him on a personal level.

Also, two games will usually make more money than one game. Not twice as much money but still a good amount more.

That reasoning doesn't make sense at all. Third versions are usually associated with the initial pair, I don't think anyone really holds nostalgia for the first two and not the third, they just have nostalgia for the region and the experience in general. So not including Emerald content in ORAS is a pretty big disappointment.
 
That reasoning doesn't make sense at all.
I appreciate you telling me that my reasoning doesn't make any sense. I will take that in consideration next time.

...

Now seriously, of course the argument makes sense.
Third versions are usually associated with the initial pair
Only by those who have actually played the third version. Which is only one third of the player base of the initial pair...
I don't think anyone really holds nostalgia for the first two and not the third
Except those who only played the first pair, and skipped the third version? Which is basically 2/3 parts of the players?
they just have nostalgia for the region and the experience in general
Many RS players, especially casuals, might not even know that Pokemon Emerald is a superior version of RS. They might think it is a completely different Pokemon game. The point is that making a paired RS remake is always gonna attract more nostalgia, than an Emerald remake, simply because A LOT more people played RS.
So not including Emerald content in ORAS is a pretty big disappointment.
It would have been more disappointing if said Emerald content was missing from a Delta Emerald game. It cannot be very disappointing, when you have been warned that the game is a RS remake.

And that's not even counting that the Delta Episode is a big part of that "Emerald Content" you are talking about.
 
Last edited:
They'd have to be insane to remake DP without taking into consideration all the complaints people had about its gameplay. This isn't RS where the only thing people bitched about the base game was the lack of backwards compatibility and praised everything else in the game to high heaven.

At the very least the pokemon distribution should be fixed and it will run on a better engine which would solve most of the problems people had with the games,
 
Only by those who have actually played the third version. Which is only one third of the player base of the initial pair...

Except those who only played the first pair, and skipped the third version? Which is basically 2/3 parts of the players?

Many RS players, especially casuals, might not even know that Pokemon Emerald is a superior version of RS. They might think it is a completely different Pokemon game. The point is that making a paired RS remake is always gonna attract more nostalgia, than an Emerald remake, simply because A LOT more people played RS.

Just because they didn't buy Emerald doesn't mean they don't want its content. It just means it's not enough to drive an additional purchase after getting Ruby or Sapphire. What the sales data isn't telling you is how each individual version did compared to Emerald, if you compared Ruby vs. Sapphire vs. Emerald it would probably be a bit less one sided, and you would probably see a lot of people just buying Ruby or Sapphire and not a lot of people buying multiple versions. So it's a bit presumptive to conclude that lower Emerald sales means they don't want Emerald's content, there's not enough information to measure the casual fanbase's demand for Emerald's content, just whether or not the content is enough to get people to buy another version.

And remember that remakes are not just about nostalgia, they're about exposing players to games they might not have played. So the Emerald content could gain new fans in the casual fans that didn't buy Emerald and new fans that were too young for the originals altogether.

It would have been more disappointing if said Emerald content was missing from a Delta Emerald game. It cannot be very disappointing, when you have been warned that the game is a RS remake.

It is disappointing when HGSS was a GS remake with Crystal content. ORAS being a RS remake doesn't mean they can't throw in more Emerald features, and when HGSS set a precedent for incorporating third version content into a dual pair it does come off as disappointing. Even though Crystal did have less extra content than Emerald it still included more of its features than ORAS did.

And that's not even counting that the Delta Episode is a big part of that "Emerald Content" you are talking about.

Story is only one aspect of Emerald that people liked about it. What about the extra features and new areas? What about the characters added to Emerald? It's not really fair to say "oh this was a big part of Emerald, that should be enough for its fans", a large part of Emerald's fanbase would be satisfied. Myself included. I didn't care about the storyline that much, I wanted to see the extra features, facilities, and areas. ORAS included none of that.

They'd have to be insane to remake DP without taking into consideration all the complaints people had about its gameplay. This isn't RS where the only thing people bitched about the base game was the lack of backwards compatibility and praised everything else in the game to high heaven.

At the very least the pokemon distribution should be fixed and it will run on a better engine which would solve most of the problems people had with the games,

Well it was a little more than that for RS, but let's not get into that and look at what you mentioned. Platinum already fixed DP's complaints about Pokemon distribution, so as long as Platinum's Sinnoh Dex is included (and based on how they handle regional dexes in remakes, I see no reason why they wouldn't), Pokemon distribution should be fine for the most part. If they really need to fix anything else, they could probably throw in Sinnoh forms to improve the variety and maybe tone down on some of the Com Mon spam in the routes. The only common complaints they would have to address in the remakes then are the game speed and the game's accessibility. And there's a couple of things they're doing in SM that could address the latter, the Rotom Dex and Pokemon Ride should work wonders in helping players navigate the region and get past the mess of obstacles in the region.
 
Last edited:
What the sales data isn't telling you is how each individual version did compared to Emerald, if you compared Ruby vs. Sapphire vs. Emerald it would probably be a bit less one sided, and you would probably see a lot of people just buying Ruby or Sapphire and not a lot of people buying multiple versions.
You can't compare RSE as 3 separate games. RS are the same game and Emerald is a different game. So RRS sales should absolutely be put together, and Emerald's apart.
It is disappointing when HGSS was a GS remake with Crystal content. ORAS being a RS remake doesn't mean they can't throw in more Emerald features, and when HGSS set a precedent for incorporating third version content into a dual pair it does come off as disappointing. Even though Crystal did have less extra content than Emerald it still included more of its features than ORAS did.
You just said it yourself. Emerald has SO MANY MORE extra features than Crystal did, that it is a lot more complicated to add Emerald's content, than the content of Cristal in HGSS. Not a good example.

Also, remember that the main thing you are demanding, the Battle Frontier, was already made in Platinum and HGSS just had to copy it. XY didn'd have a BF so for ORAS they would have to make a new one from scratch.

More importantly, yes, HGSS had more Crystal content (because it was easy to implement), but less new, ORIGINAL content than ORAS (only Pokeathlon and new Safari Zone). And no new Pokemon formes added.

ORAS adds 30 brand new Pokemon formes, the concept of Primal Reversion, a completely revamped Metropoli, underwater battles, Soaring, DexNav, 38 new Mirage Spots, and an entire postgame Delta Episode.

So basically more NEW content.

Ultimately, you are missing the main difference between HGSS and ORAS.

HGSS was made mostly with the original players in mind (in an interview, Morimoto says his main goal when directing HGSS was to respect the feelings of the fans of GSC).

ORAS has a different mindset. Instead of bringing that Hoenn of RSE to the present, they tried to reimagine Hoenn and remake it to be more suitable for modern times, with more new content they think would be more suitable for modern players, and removing some RSE content they think isn't suitable for modern players.

I am going to be honest. I think the mindset of HGSS is better for a remake, than the mindset of ORAS, because respecting the feelings of the original fanbase is important for me (since I am one of those original players for both games).

But I do think the mindset of ORAS is better for the modern players, which are the key target of ORAS imo).

And besides, ORAS is not really a remake, when you think of it. It is an alternative, reimagined version of Hoenn. This is even confirmed INGAME, by Zinnia. This is a "slightly different" version of Hoenn.

This actually is a good justification for why ORAS is different form HGSS. It simply follows an other formula, and allows the developers for more freedom of excluding and including different things they find more/less appropriate for a modern Pokemon game.
 
Last edited:
I think we shouldn't expect third game content in remakes whether we like it or not. Game Freak can do what they want with the remakes. The whole point of remakes is to bring back older games in a fresher way while keeping the original content. If people wanted Emerald or Crystal content then GF would have made Emerald and Crystal remakes. However, one game makes less money than two games. Selling two instead of one is a business strategy.

For all we know the next remakes might not have any third version content if they want to stay completely original. Although I would prefer a post game for Giratina considering Rayquaza got one for ORAS. HGSS didn't had a third legendary post game since Lugia and Ho-oh are not part of a trio or even connected to each other since Ho-oh relates to the beasts and Lugia relates to the birds. FRLG had starters as mascots so there was no major post game story for a legendary pokemon.

Expecting games to have content you want won't make it happen. Even expecting certain games to be announced might not happen since Game Freak can pull surprises on us. I, for one, decided to not rely on typical patterns like third version games because it would be too obvious for Game Freak to do and they want to surprise us with unexpected games and game content.
 
You can't compare RSE as 3 separate games. RS are the same game and Emerald is a different game. So RRS sales should absolutely be put together, and Emerald's apart.

No, that's not really a fair assessment. Ruby and Sapphire are separate purchases, so RS' sales are inflated by that difference. Some people bought both Ruby and Sapphire, so the RS fanbase is a bit smaller than it looks. When you take into account how many people bought only one and how many people bought both, Emerald's sales are a bit closer.

And Emerald really isn't a different game either. It's RS with some enhancements.

You just said it yourself. Emerald has SO MANY MORE extra features than Crystal did, that it is a lot more complicated to add Emerald's content, than the content of Cristal in HGSS. Not a good example.

So in this case maybe it would've been unreasonable to expect every single thing Emerald did to make it in. But missing the Battle Frontier is major, the Battle Frontier was a huge feature and was heavily promoted in 3rd gen.

Also, remember that the main thing you are demanding, the Battle Frontier, was already made in Platinum and HGSS just had to copy it. XY didn'd have a BF so for ORAS they would have to make a new one from scratch.

I can't imagine that would be terribly hard, they'd just need to recreate the areas and the rest should be pretty simple.

More importantly, yes, HGSS had more Crystal content (because it was easy to implement), but less new, ORIGINAL content than ORAS (only Pokeathlon and new Safari Zone). And no new Pokemon formes added.

ORAS adds 30 brand new Pokemon formes, the concept of Primal Reversion, a completely revamped Metropoli, underwater battles, Soaring, DexNav, 38 new Mirage Spots, and an entire postgame Delta Episode.

So basically more NEW content.

Primal Reversion is pretty much the same as Mega Evolution, so that shouldn't really count twice. Underwater battles are just extra trainer battles, there's nothing special about them. And the Mirage Spots were extremely tiny and just glorified containers for extra post game Pokemon (which HGSS had more of). And ORAS isn't the only game with revamped areas, Mt. Silver was also revamped in HGSS. So they're a lot closer in terms of new content than you think.

Ultimately, you are missing the main difference between HGSS and ORAS.

HGSS was made mostly with the original players in mind (in an interview, Morimoto says his main goal when directing HGSS was to respect the feelings of the fans of GSC).

ORAS has a different mindset. Instead of bringing that Hoenn of RSE to the present, they tried to reimagine Hoenn and remake it to be more suitable for modern times, with more new content they think would be more suitable for modern players, and removing some RSE content they think isn't suitable for modern players.

I am going to be honest. I think the mindset of HGSS is better for a remake, than the mindset of ORAS, because respecting the feelings of the original fanbase is important for me (since I am one of those original players for both games).

But I do think the mindset of ORAS is better for the modern players, which are the key target of ORAS imo).

And besides, ORAS is not really a remake, when you think of it. It is an alternative, reimagined version of Hoenn. This is even confirmed INGAME, by Zinnia. This is a "slightly different" version of Hoenn.

This actually is a good justification for why ORAS is different form HGSS. It simply follows an other formula, and allows the developers for more freedom of excluding and including different things they find more/less appropriate for a modern Pokemon game.

They really need to respect the feelings of both audiences though, and that's the problem with the "modern" mindset is that it almost completely revolves around the casuals and the aspects of the games they think that audience cares about instead of simply creating a high quality, well rounded game that appeals to multiple demographics. If you look at what they've done with the 6th gen games Game Freak is a lot more biased towards new Pokemon and forms, story, and accessibility than content, difficulty, and exploration. This kind of approach turns off fans who like the latter, so that handicaps their games' sales.

Fortunately, Game Freak seems to be taking a more balanced approach with SM, the game looks to be accessible for casuals yet free and deep enough for older fans, and that kind of approach would probably be better for the DP remakes. Sinnoh is beloved for its content, but has had issues with accessibility, so focusing on making the game easier to navigate while still retaining the game's sense of scale and depth is a must for Game Freak to get both audiences interested.

I think we shouldn't expect third game content in remakes whether we like it or not. Game Freak can do what they want with the remakes. The whole point of remakes is to bring back older games in a fresher way while keeping the original content. If people wanted Emerald or Crystal content then GF would have made Emerald and Crystal remakes. However, one game makes less money than two games. Selling two instead of one is a business strategy.

For all we know the next remakes might not have any third version content if they want to stay completely original. Although I would prefer a post game for Giratina considering Rayquaza got one for ORAS. HGSS didn't had a third legendary post game since Lugia and Ho-oh are not part of a trio or even connected to each other since Ho-oh relates to the beasts and Lugia relates to the birds. FRLG had starters as mascots so there was no major post game story for a legendary pokemon.

Expecting games to have content you want won't make it happen. Even expecting certain games to be announced might not happen since Game Freak can pull surprises on us. I, for one, decided to not rely on typical patterns like third version games because it would be too obvious for Game Freak to do and they want to surprise us with unexpected games and game content.

The problem with lowering your expectations is that it makes Game Freak complacent and we end up with a lower quality game, if they can get away with providing you less than they'll gladly do it, it saves them money. We have to hold Game Freak accountable for what we perceive to be a subpar product if they're not meeting our expectations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom