• Bubapedia Error 503 Backend fetch failed

    Our technical staff are continuing to monitor the wiki to try and resolve these ongoing issues that are impacting page and image loading. We apologize for the inconvenience. We'll update as soon as we've got more information on this for you.

  • Check out our new Mysterious Garden forum style if you haven't already - we're sure you'll love it!
  • If you are finding yourself unable to log in, you should be able to fix the issue by following the following process.
    1. Close all browser tabs with any part of Bulbagarden open.
    2. Delete all Bulbagarden.net cookies (and if possible, any cached site data for Bulbagarden) from your browser.
    3. Close and reopen your browser, open a new tab, and log into the forums on the new tab.
    If you've followed this process and are still having issues, please contact us via the "Contact us" link at the bottom of the forum.

Rumour thread (SPOILERS - ALLEGED LEAKS)

Status
Not open for further replies.

MM3000

New Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I've always thought Ruby and Sapphire were the worst of the series but again I'm likely one of the oldest people snooping around the thread as I was 11 when Red and Blue were new :p . After Gold and Silver , Ruby and Sapphire seemed like a step backward. So to be honest I don't really have a huge need for it. I was excited when Gold and Silver were made again though.

I generally think the same, however, I see the possibility of a remake (or even better a new adventure in Hoenn) as redemption of sorts for RSE (or just Hoenn).
 

Lufenium

#1 Wooloo Fan
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
2,380
Reaction score
2,373
What if the Hoenn guy is just referring to the Battle Tower variant we are supposed to see post-game in Kalos. That would be super lame.

I thought this as well. It's a rather ambiguous quote at best.
 

Isaac Gravity

Drifter
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
553
Reaction score
153
I've always thought Ruby and Sapphire were the worst of the series but again I'm likely one of the oldest people snooping around the thread as I was 11 when Red and Blue were new :p . After Gold and Silver , Ruby and Sapphire seemed like a step backward. So to be honest I don't really have a huge need for it. I was excited when Gold and Silver were made again though.

How old you are has little to do with ones beliefs vs the actual quality of something that exists so let's not play that card here.
 

Robo-Floatzel

Jacen the Robot Floatzel
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
1,782
Reaction score
324

AmphBoss

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
163
Reaction score
36
@Planky

2 Questions; Are you shitting me about my Ice Wolf & does Aegislash really work how the bloke on VP describes it. Shield stance when passive & sword stance when attacking but with Kings Shield able to destroy the opponents attack stat? if so then this is massively overpowered.

Yep. It shouldn't be massively overpowered though. Taunt will ruin it.

I'm thinking purely in game but even competitively it will affect the balance significantly.
 

Dread Advocate

†Stay Metal†
Joined
Sep 20, 2011
Messages
179
Reaction score
2

I'd say "HOENN CONFIRMED!" as the top of my lungs, but let's be honest, that meme has gotten old at this point, let's enjoy Kalos for the moment...

Half-Life 3 confirmed then?

On topic: The total amount of new Pokemon is a bit disappointing, but it's not gonna keep me from playing the games. This generation, however, may take Gen IV's place as my least favorite because of this low amount and because of the rather bland type distribution.
 

Amoebo

Popplio Defense Squad
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
610
Reaction score
41
Im really not so sure, it makes more sense because then dual type dragons would be nerfed sooooo bad
 

Enzap

radical
Joined
May 21, 2010
Messages
16,359
Reaction score
6,182
Pronouns
he/him
because the way the fandom is erupting it seems new pokemon is all that matters to anyone. a remake would have zero new pokemon. thats not logical?

i dont want to argue about it and i think there is another thread for it anyway. this was just in reply to that "hint" put into kalos.

(by the way, i do not think there is a problem with the amount of pokemon, so do not take my post to mean i need to be told it is not actually a low number!)

Honestly the fandom has reacted to only 70~ Pokemon much better than I would have expected it to. I thought there would be a lot of "Nope, not buying this game because there's not enough new guys." I think the most general consensus is more like "Only 70? Darn... better luck next time."

But even assuming it was a huge deal to every player, that still is unrelated to the success of a potential remake. In the first game of a new generation, people want to see new features, and specifically new Pokemon since that is the focus of the franchise. However, in a remake, people aren't expecting new Pokemon. They're expecting an old game updated with the latest features, not revolutionary new bells and whistles or a completely new dex. If introducing zero new Pokemon was that detrimental to the success of a game, then how were LeafGreen, FireRed, SoulSilver, and HeartGold were all so popular?
 

Shiny Celebi

Phantom Thief
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
29,767
Reaction score
2,698
Pronouns
Any. Not picky
Admittedly, it used to be a bigger deal for me myself since my favorite part of a new generation is the new Pokemon, but now I don't really care so much. I feel like we got a lot of really well designed ones and I can't think of many if any I don't like. Also they used a lot of unused type combos which I am pretty happy with so for me it's not really a big deal anymore.
 

sunyshore

Electric Obsession
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
895
Reaction score
1
because the way the fandom is erupting it seems new pokemon is all that matters to anyone. a remake would have zero new pokemon. thats not logical?

i dont want to argue about it and i think there is another thread for it anyway. this was just in reply to that "hint" put into kalos.

(by the way, i do not think there is a problem with the amount of pokemon, so do not take my post to mean i need to be told it is not actually a low number!)

Honestly the fandom has reacted to only 70~ Pokemon much better than I would have expected it to. I thought there would be a lot of "Nope, not buying this game because there's not enough new guys." I think the most general consensus is more like "Only 70? Darn... better luck next time."

But even assuming it was a huge deal to every player, that still is unrelated to the success of a potential remake. In the first game of a new generation, people want to see new features, and specifically new Pokemon since that is the focus of the franchise. However, in a remake, people aren't expecting new Pokemon. They're expecting an old game updated with the latest features, not revolutionary new bells and whistles or a completely new dex. If introducing zero new Pokemon was that detrimental to the success of a game, then how were LeafGreen, FireRed, SoulSilver, and HeartGold were all so popular?

no need for the long explanation! i know remakes are popular. i'm commenting entirely on the complaints about the 'low number' of pokemon, not the popularity of remakes. was a little joke about how can people be looking at remakes when they are hardly finished complaining as though all the other new stuff is pointless if theres only 70 pokemon. i've learned my lesson; don't make a joke about RSE remakes on this forum.
 

faucin

New Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
301
Reaction score
1
im okay with the quantity of new pokemons because i like most of their desings, and also it seems we have plenty of mega evos. im on the fence with the amount of pokemon obtainable, given that i want to use kalos pokemons only and it will be difficult to get them this way, but i like that there is a lot of pokemon available as it makes it more "real" in a way, and in BW i hated the only unova pokes (mostly because i dislike most of them). at this point with over 700+ pokes its not a big deal they dont keep introducing 100+ every gen, we have a lot of choices, and they still make enough to have variety among the new ones, so its cool
 

Robo-Floatzel

Jacen the Robot Floatzel
Joined
Oct 26, 2010
Messages
1,782
Reaction score
324

I'd say "HOENN CONFIRMED!" as the top of my lungs, but let's be honest, that meme has gotten old at this point, let's enjoy Kalos for the moment...

Half-Life 3 confirmed then?

On topic: The total amount of new Pokemon is a bit disappointing, but it's not gonna keep me from playing the games. This generation, however, may take Gen IV's place as my least favorite because of this low amount and because of the rather bland type distribution.

I wish...

Back on topic, I do agree that there are too few new Pokemon, unless there are ones we don't know about sealed within the games data that we have yet to see, and won't see until XY2/Z, since the 3DS games are said to be hard to hack, but let's be honest, nothing is truly un-hackable, so it's possible that they are not showing us something.

To be fair, it's because they wanted to focus mostly on older Pokemon and Mega Evolutions, something unusual for a newer generation to do, which is probably my problem with this generation is that too much focus is given to the older Pokemon than it is the newer ones, rather than balancing the older ones with the newer ones equally like they did in Johto.
 

Enzap

radical
Joined
May 21, 2010
Messages
16,359
Reaction score
6,182
Pronouns
he/him
no need for the long explanation! i know remakes are popular. i'm commenting entirely on the complaints about the 'low number' of pokemon, not the popularity of remakes. was a little joke about how can people be looking at remakes when they are hardly finished complaining as though all the other new stuff is pointless if theres only 70 pokemon. i've learned my lesson; don't make a joke about RSE remakes on this forum.

Ah, my apologies then. The post came across to me as more argumentative then I think you meant for it too. ^^

I guess I might as well give my two cents on the number of Pokemon this generation. I believe Game Freak was trying to use a more holistic approach this generation. Black and White felt like it was trying too hard to be its own unique game apart from the rest of the franchise by using its own dex without older Pokemon, while adding few new mechanisms to the games. I think this is trying to do the opposite. X and Y feel like an extension of the previous games, building upon the old universe and characters with brand new features and graphics. With 649 other Pokemon to play off of, I think they just decided that adding over 100 jus wasn't necessary and instead made fewer designs and implemented new ideas into them, both strategically and visually, that we haven't seen yet. Or in some cases old ideas remade with a new flair. If this is what they were attempting, I think they've succeeded based on what we've seen so far. Few disappointing designs, definitely a plethora of new and engaging features, and very impressive graphics.
 

Rainbow

literal shrubbery
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
3,956
Reaction score
15
I've warmed up to the 70 Pokemon thing, because they're really good and there's quite a few unique typings. At least there's enough build a full team. Bit annoyed at some of the evo requirements though, especially not getting Goodra until lv. 70
 

Lunala

Active Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
738
Reaction score
731
Well they introduced a lot of Ghost types this gen. Especially considering the smaller number of Pokemon.

So I'm satisfied. They all look cool, too.

On another note, adding Fairy type seems to have made Game Freak think putting a ton of Dragons in willy-nilly is okay. >.> I like Dragon-types, but eh. I wish they'd made a Fairy-type pseudo-legendary.
 

The Outrage

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
13,955
Reaction score
1,773
I wouldn't mind the 69 Pokemon if we had more Mega Evolutions confirmed. Last I checked, we only have 18, but effectively only have 16 Pokemon getting Mega Evolutions so far because of X and Y Mega Evolutions. Even if we count those as new Pokemon like we would cross-gen evolutions that only brings us up to 87, which is the least amount of new Pokemon we've gotten. I'd have thought the main game or at least the post game would be crawling with Mega evolutions.
 

Norzan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
2,143
Reaction score
1,280
At first it bothered me that Gen 6 has only around 70 new pokemon but because how awesome they all look like it doesn't bother me anymore. I love Gen 5 pokemon but if they didn't added some pokemon (not gonna say wich ones) it would have made Gen 5 much better, so yeah sometimes quality is better than quantity.
 

Rainbow

literal shrubbery
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
3,956
Reaction score
15
I definitely thought we'd get way more megas, given there's no cross gen evos (except Sylveon) and that they hyped the feature quite a bit. I'll be really disappointed if there's none for Dunsparce, Gallade, or Sableye
 

TheBugChampion

The Great and Powerful
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
336
Reaction score
0
with what's we've been given, i think i can have a decent team of 6 i'll enjoy playing with, limiting one slot to a kanto starter/previous-gen poke, for the main portion of the game. might rotate out my last slot but i've narrowed it down pretty easy.

i plan on getting X but one spot has Dragalge's name on it. any idea how early we can trade? and what level skrelp was captured at?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top