BDSP Why the hate for Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl

[Bolt Strike]

Zelda has gotten three remakes (less than one compared to Pokemon and the series is like 10 years older than Pokemon), everything else has either been ports or remasters.


They were more like ports since they were based on Super Mario All Stars for the SNES. Only really 3 got a remake but again, made in the same style as the Super Mario All Star games.


Square Enix is just as guilty as Gamefreak in thinking they need to remake everything.

Most of the remakes of the first three are stuck in Japan (i think 3 got like a GB remake in late 90s and that was the only one released outside of Japan). 4, 5 and 6 did get remakes, but they all deserved it. And not because how pricey they are in the second hand market (and ironically the remakes are pricey now), but because 4 was made for the NES, and 5 and 6 had never left Japan. 7 is an actual remake, but 8 is more like a port than a remake. And again, Square Enix.

Remakes for pokemon games now feel much less about a game deserving it but more because it has become tradition. Which i don't think it's a good thing, made worse when clearly Gamefreak is getting tired of them by outsourcing them and that causing them to be less than spectacular.

And me personally, i'm just sick of remakes in general, not just in Pokemon.

It seems like many "remakes" in the industry in general are closer to remasters like BDSP and remakes along the lines of HGSS and ORAS are rare, Pokemon fans have gotten spoiled when it comes to remakes. That's not to say that I think we should just accept the more remastery remakes, I hate them, just that that's the norm for the industry and what Pokemon fans are used to tends to be above and beyond. Outside of HGSS and ORAS, the only ones I know of off the top of my head that have actually significantly changed things from the original are the two Metroid remakes (Zero Mission and Samus Returns) and Super Mario 64 DS (there's also FFVII Remake, but I'm not a FF fan and I'm not familiar with either the original or the remake so I can't weigh in on that one). Outside of that many of them feel more like ports and remasters, just graphical upgrades, sometimes significant, sometimes minor, with little to no improvements in gameplay. At best they might add like, one new gameplay feature, but in general the original experience is almost completely untouched and the changes in the remakes largely consist of graphical and QoL improvements. Changes such as new areas, storyline events, characters, enemies, and bosses usually don't happen in remakes the way they did in HGSS and ORAS.

I can't even tell which of the "three" Zelda games you're referring to as remakes because the Zelda remakes are largely similar. I know one of them is Link's Awakening because that has updated graphics and the dungeon maker mode added, but what are the other 2? OoT and MM? Never played MM (although a quick Google search suggests that game isn't terribly different), but the 3DS version of OoT is largely the same and definitely falls into the category of being a more remastery feeling remake.

 

[There Is No Arceus]

i'm aware that most remakes are little more than remasters and there's no real reason to buy them if you have the original, but pokemon remakes have always been more than that. we know that gamefreak are capable of things like HGSS and ORAS, so it's not unreasonable to judge any new remakes they produce by that standard. i'm hard on this series because i love this series, and i want to see them do well.

 

[Bolt Strike]

i'm aware that most remakes are little more than remasters and there's no real reason to buy them if you have the original, but pokemon remakes have always been more than that. we know that gamefreak are capable of things like HGSS and ORAS, so it's not unreasonable to judge any new remakes they produce by that standard. i'm hard on this series because i love this series, and i want to see them do well.

Oh no, I'm not saying we should lower our standards and I totally agree that we should get more remakes like HGSS and ORAS. I'm just bringing that up to make people aware that BDSP is more regressing to the mean and they're falling short of Pokemon standards for remakes, not industry standards for remakes.

 

[Norzan]

Changes such as new areas, storyline events, characters, enemies, and bosses usually don't happen in remakes the way they did in HGSS and ORAS.

They do? Resident Evil 1 Remake got plenty of changes for example (Crimson Heads for one). Same for the Dragon Quest DS remakes (which are honestly better than any pokemon remake).

Even though i give shit to Square Enix for flooding the market with remakes, the remakes of Final Fantasy 3 and 4 (both the DS and PSP for the latter) are genuinely great. Also helps that the DS remake of 3 was when the game was finally released outside of Japan since the NES version was stuck there for like 16 years.

Never played MM (although a quick Google search suggests that game isn't terribly different), but the 3DS version of OoT is largely the same and definitely falls into the category of being a more remastery feeling remake.

Plenty of changes in both, some controversial (mainly in Majora's Mask). And i mean, HGSS doesn't really play any differently from GSC, same for ORAS and RS. And the stuff they added really didn't changed anything about the core gameplay besides stuff like Pokeathlon and the revamped Safari Zone, which are optional. Their cores are mostly the same as the originals.

If anything since ORAS i have became weary of pokemon remakes, even though i think that was mostly fine.

 

[Bolt Strike]

They do? Resident Evil 1 Remake got plenty of changes for example (Crimson Heads for one). Same for the Dragon Quest DS remakes (which are honestly better than any pokemon remake).

Even though i give shit to Square Enix for flooding the market with remakes, the remakes of Final Fantasy 3 and 4 (both the DS and PSP for the latter) are genuinely great. Also helps that the DS remake of 3 was when the game was finally released outside of Japan since the NES version was stuck there for like 16 years.

Not a fan of either of those IPs, so I can't weigh in there. I do play mostly Nintendo games (I tend to play about 80% Nintendo games, 20% other games), so it may just be a Nintendo game, but I have seen multiple non-Nintendo remakes do many of the same things.

Plenty of changes in both, some controversial (mainly in Majora's Mask). And i mean, HGSS doesn't really play any differently from GSC, same for ORAS and RS. And the stuff they added really didn't changed anything about the core gameplay besides stuff like Pokeathlon and the revamped Safari Zone, which are optional. Their cores are mostly the same as the originals.

If anything since ORAS i have became weary of pokemon remakes, even though i think that was mostly fine.

OoT mainly had QoL and graphical changes. They updated the visuals, changes some symbols and music that was offensive to Muslims, replaced the Stone of Agony with the Shard of Agony (which largely does the same thing anyway), and added in a boss rematch mode. None of that is really new content (as in new areas, new storyline events, new enemies and bosses, new sidequests, etc.), OoT 3D didn't have any kind of additions of that nature and there's a feeling that if you've played one version of OoT you've played them all. HGSS and ORAS were much more progressive when it comes to new content than most remakes and have plenty of each category:

New areas:
HGSS- Rt. 47, Rt. 48, Safari Zone, Embedded Tower, Seafoam Islands, Cerulean Cave
ORAS- Mirage Spots

New storyline events:
HGSS- Celebi event, minor dialogue changes to main story
ORAS- Delta Episode, minor dialogue changes to main story

New Enemies (Pokemon in this case):
HGSS- 3rd and 4th gen Pokemon
ORAS- 4th, 5th, and 6th gen Pokemon

New Bosses (also legendaries in Pokemon's case):
HGSS- gym leader rematches, various 1st and 3rd gen legendaries (bird trio, Mewtwo, Groudon/Kyogre, Rayquaza, Latios/Latias)
ORAS- Zinnia, Hoopa portal legendaries

New Sidequests:
HGSS- Pokeathlon, Battle Frontier
ORAS- Battle Resort

Pick any one of these additions and it would be more than the 3DS version did for OoT. So no, HGSS and ORAS did way more than OoT 3D and it isn't even a contest. It didn't matter that the core was still the same for HGSS and ORAS, there was a lot more extras surrounding the core game than OoT 3D could even dream of.

 

[Norzan]

HGSS and ORAS were much more progressive when it comes to new content than most remakes and have plenty of each category

Not really when most of the content you are mentioning is rather minor and actually doesn't add much to the game in terms of content. I don't think adding events that most won't see (and even then they are short like that Celebi event), making some legendaries catchable (which they do all the time and it doesn't amount to much game time), adding couple of routes you just blast through and don't even come back to, and adding a copy and pasted Battle Frontier from a third version is considered "plenty".

If anything, ORAS is guilty of adding hardly anything substantial (which is one of the things some people threw at it shortly after release, even in this same forum), specially when Delta episode was supposedly meant to replace the Emerald Battle Frontier but all it is an hour long chase where you run around following some character through areas you already been. Emerald did more than ORAS in terms of adding to the base Hoenn games and that's a third version (and in my opinion Emerald is better than ORAS and more worthwhile).

HGSS forgot to fix egregious flaws with the originals like bad typing distribution, the bad level curve (early Kanto is the worst of this), how the whole story is dumb, specially with how it ends, how small Johto feels (which is definitely because it's attached to Kanto like a siamese twin), Johto Gym Leaders having Kanto pokemon as their aces and how barren Kanto still is. I would have taken those being fixed over some of the additions that really didn't amount to much like making a couple of dungeons from the Gen 1 games enterable like Seaforms islands and Cerulean Cave. I do like the Pokeathlon, the Battle Frontier (it is copy and pasted from Platinum but it's better than nothing) and the revamped Safari Zone.

Yeah, they might have more than OoT 3D in terms of new additions, still below a lot of remakes because OoT 3D is just an average remake in terms of changes. I have played with lengthy postgames consisting of multiple floors, long dungeons (and not a literal single room where you can catch three pokemon. And to even catch the last one, you need one from the other version which is always fun) with entirely new items, bosses and music. New localizations adding much more depth to characters, plus actual new characters. Making more characters playable. Adding more main story events, some optional if you want to learn the backstory of some characters. New areas in the main story with new bosses and items. Rebalanced enemies, items, skills and playable characters. New minigames and game modes.

I will add that OoT 3D making the Water Temple not trash to traverse, making Iron Boots their own dedicated button and adding a fourth slot for items is actually more than some of the stuff pokemon remakes have done (QoL a lot of the time do much more than just more content). Plus, i doubt Nintendo would want to add much to this remake given how beloved OoT is (which is dumb, but it's still a thing. Look at BDSP and GF's claims of wanting to be faithful to the originals).


I think the claim that pokemon remakes do more than most remakes is a rather big exaggeration. So i disagree with the claim that pokemon remakes standards are somehow above industry standards (the last two remakes are far below many non-pokemon remakes and the best pokemon remakes are below plenty of non-pokemon remakes). Yeah, there are some lazy remakes out there, but pokemon remakes aren't some incredibly high standard that most of the industry can't achieve, that is my point.

I do play mostly Nintendo games (I tend to play about 80% Nintendo games, 20% other games), so it may just be a Nintendo game, but I have seen multiple non-Nintendo remakes do many of the same things.

So you play mostly nintendo games, so how would you know what remakes from non-Nintendo titles do? Just looking at a glance is not the same as playing them.

 

[Bolt Strike]

Not really when most of the content you are mentioning is rather minor and actually doesn't add much to the game in terms of content. I don't think adding events that most won't see (and even then they are short like that Celebi event), making some legendaries catchable (which they do all the time and it doesn't amount to much game time), adding couple of routes you just blast through and don't even come back to, and adding a copy and pasted Battle Frontier from a third version is considered "plenty".

That's a good 10+ hours worth of content, to say that's "not significant" is utterly befuddling and makes me wonder if you even played HGSS. Exploring the areas themselves might not take too long, but battling the trainers and catching the Pokemon that exist in those areas takes up more time. And even with a copy/pasted Battle Frontier it's still a whopping 5 battle facilities for you to play around with which also takes up a significant amount of time.

If anything, ORAS is guilty of adding hardly anything substantial (which is one of the things some people threw at it shortly after release, even in this same forum), specially when Delta episode was supposedly meant to replace the Emerald Battle Frontier but all it is an hour long chase where you run around following some character through areas you already been. Emerald did more than ORAS in terms of adding to the base Hoenn games and that's a third version (and in my opinion Emerald is better than ORAS and more worthwhile).

There are some things from Emerald I do miss (I'd have liked to have the Battle Frontier and some of the extra story events), but what Emerald did was mainly a few post game extra areas. ORAS, besides adding the Delta Episodes, added Mirage Spots which gave you a ton of Pokemon to catch and some areas to explore (not as much as a full area, but still something), added the Dexnav which also added new Pokemon and made hunting for... just about anything much easier. Ultimately I would consider Emerald vs. ORAS to be a wash, which still isn't great for a remake, but again better than almost every other remake I've played (and certainly better than most Nintendo remakes I've played).

HGSS forgot to fix egregious flaws with the originals like bad typing distribution, the bad level curve (early Kanto is the worst of this), how the whole story is dumb, specially with how it ends, how small Johto feels (which is definitely because it's attached to Kanto like a siamese twin), Johto Gym Leaders having Kanto pokemon as their aces and how barren Kanto still is. I would have taken those being fixed over some of the additions that really didn't amount to much like making a couple of dungeons from the Gen 1 games enterable like Seaforms islands and Cerulean Cave. I do like the Pokeathlon, the Battle Frontier (it is copy and pasted from Platinum but it's better than nothing) and the revamped Safari Zone.

It didn't "forget" to do those things, most of that was unfixable and the rest was considered unfixable in Game Freak's eyes. The level curve is a byproduct of Johto being, as you put it, Kanto's siamese twin. They had to include two regions at the same level curve as other games, that's bound to slow things down. The typing distribution couldn't really be fixed without a significant dex expansion that included 3rd and 4th gen Pokemon because type distribution was largely imbalanced period among the 1st and 2nd gen Pokemon (I would argue that the National Dex itself wasn't entirely balanced until 5th gen even), and Game Freak has been largely unwilling to add more than a handful of cross gen evos to the remakes' regional dexes. There are some things I wish they would've done better such as a dex expansion and fixing the gym leader rosters, but they seem to believe those things would mess with the nostalgia so they gave us the next best thing which was tons of additional content. In that context, HGSS was about as good as it could've possibly been.

Yeah, they might have more than OoT 3D in terms of new additions, still below a lot of remakes because OoT 3D is just an average remake in terms of changes. I have played with lengthy postgames consisting of multiple floors, long dungeons (and not a literal single room where you can catch three pokemon. And to even catch the last one, you need one from the other version which is always fun) with entirely new items, bosses and music. New localizations adding much more depth to characters, plus actual new characters. Making more characters playable. Adding more main story events, some optional if you want to learn the backstory of some characters. New areas in the main story with new bosses and items. Rebalanced enemies, items, skills and playable characters. New minigames and game modes.

And what is this long list of remakes Pokemon remakes are somehow below?

I will add that OoT 3D making the Water Temple not trash to traverse, making Iron Boots their own dedicated button and adding a fourth slot for items is actually more than some of the stuff pokemon remakes have done (QoL a lot of the time do much more than just more content). Plus, i doubt Nintendo would want to add much to this remake given how beloved OoT is (which is dumb, but it's still a thing. Look at BDSP and GF's claims of wanting to be faithful to the originals).

QoL really doesn't change how you interact with the game all that much, they're usually just minor tweaks. There have been some major ones, such as Free Aiming in Metroid Samus Returns, but in general it's not all that much.

And if you want to make the claim of "things that only affect part of the game's content don't count much", improving the Water Temple isn't much either. Adding item slots doesn't really do much either aside from cut down some time spent toggling through menu.

 

[There Is No Arceus]

HGSS and ORAS definitely changed up a lot more than the OoT remake did. OoT on the 3ds felt like the exact same game as the one i played on the N64 way back when. the pokemon remakes felt like better versions of the past games. the new additions like walking pokemon in HGSS and mega evolution in ORAS really made the games stand out, whereas the easier water temple and extra item slot did not make OoT 3D feel different from the old one

 

[Peppermint Phoenix]

Why do some people say that these games are just copy and paste versions of the gen 4 games? They must really hate Fire Red and Leaf Green then, since those are copy and paste versions of the Gen 1 games. Same with the Gen 3 Remakes to an extent; Those are mostly a copy and paste version of the Gen 3 games. Even the Gen 2 remakes.

Most fans of the mainline games were children or non existent from Firered came out. Also BDSP costs $60

 

[RexMissingno]

I don't hate it but I don't personally like BDSP as much. A lot of this comes from comparing it to other remakes and how they typically feel like they expand upon the previous games - FRLG added all the new features from Pokemon at that point (abilities, special defense/attack split, held items, etc) and the Sevii Islands, HGSS added Pokemon walking with you , the Pokeathelon, and Safari Zone, ORAS added the Dexnav, Mega Evolution, and flying. In all remakes besides BDSP all the characters get expanded upon to where the storyline is a lot more interesting while BDSP has 1:1 characters and text. The graphical improvements feel very lacking and while every other remakes the graphics are a very strong point for BSDP it just feels boring.

Most of the flaws to me come from how hard it's trying to be a faithful remake. With most other remakes I would recommend them as opposed to the original games (except for maybe Emerald but even then it's still ORAS over RS), because BDSP is so close to DP at that point aside from quality of life changes it feels like it doesn't really matter which you get. Price isn't even a factor - I looked it up and you can get Diamond or Pearl for the same price or less as BDSP. If you got lucky you could even get a (probably broken in some way) DS and Diamond/Pearl for $60 - the same price as BDSP new.

I don't hate BDSP though and I still fully understand why people might enjoy it. I just don't like it as a remake and it was more boring to me as someone who played Pokemon Diamond extensively as a kid.

 

[There Is No Arceus]

in my opinion, a faithful remake is not something you should do pretty much ever. remakes need to justify their existence by standing out; by going above and beyond to improve on the original game. otherwise, you might as well just play the original. up till now, pokemon remakes have always gone the extra mile to make the remakes worth your time. BDSP, however, falls short in my eyes.

 

[UxieLover1994]

in my opinion, a faithful remake is not something you should do pretty much ever. remakes need to justify their existence by standing out; by going above and beyond to improve on the original game. otherwise, you might as well just play the original. up till now, pokemon remakes have always gone the extra mile to make the remakes worth your time. BDSP, however, falls short in my eyes.

Disney has already proven why shot-for-shot remakes don't work. They're remaking everything (except Pocahontas and presumably Tarzan) into live-action purely out of profit and defeatism (given the failure of Tomorrowland kicked off the live-actions remakes, and Solo and The BFG resulted in more being greenlighted), and are unlikely going to stop even when faced with increasingly negative reviews and possible Razzie awards. Given how BDSP improved almost nothing, and LGPE was watered down and given too much hand-holding, people are going to start dreading remakes as nothing but beefed-up cash grabs.

I fear remakes for BW will go down the same path as BDSP, and only have the first 649 Pokémon (at best) along with minor changes.

 

[There Is No Arceus]

I fear remakes for BW will go down the same path as BDSP, and only have the first 649 Pokémon (at best) along with minor changes.

Honestly, i think a limited dex would make sense for BW remakes, as the whole point of those games was that you had to use Unova pokemon only and couldn't really get mons from other regions during the story

 

[UxieLover1994]

Honestly, i think a limited dex would make sense for BW remakes, as the whole point of those games was that you had to use Unova pokemon only and couldn't really get mons from other regions during the story

That is true, although what I was referring to was whether the possible BW remakes would be shot-for-shot and include the National Dex up to Genesect after clearing the game, or if the games go the way of HGSS/ORAS and include all Pokémon after clearing the game, the way of LGPE and include only Generation V Pokémon plus regional forms (except for Galarian Yamask and White-Striped Basculin), or its own unique way (for example, expanding the dex to include Runerigus, Basculegion, and Enamorus, but only have a limited non-Unova set akin to SwSh, PLA, and presumably SV).

 

[Bolt Strike]

Honestly, i think a limited dex would make sense for BW remakes, as the whole point of those games was that you had to use Unova pokemon only and couldn't really get mons from other regions during the story

That was a bad idea in the first place. Forcing people to only use the new Pokemon is a huge risk because you don't know if they'll like the new Pokemon, and if they like the old Pokemon and hate the new Pokemon, they'll hate the entire roster of the game. And considering the controversy behind that decision and the quick reversal of it in BW2, it's pretty safe to say it didn't pay off.

Yeah, they'll probably do it and restrict you to just the 5th gen Pokemon in the main story (and maybe just the BW2 additions in the post game), but I also won't get such a game. I thought vanilla BW was mediocre (the only good thing about it was the story, everything else was a step backwards from Pt and HGSS) and BW2 was closer to what BW should've been in the first place. And I am especially done tolerating regional dexes like BW Unova, I want to see regional dexes more like BW2's, that was the first (and arguably the only, although regional dexes like Kalos, Alola, and Galar are about as good as we can get at this point with low numbers of new Pokemon being the new normal for the series) regional dex in series history that had no major variety issues. No types that only have a handful of Pokemon leading to terrible rosters like Agatha, Lance, and Flint's, a good mix of old and new Pokemon that has something for everyone, and a decent mix of Pokemon in each area instead of 17 different areas with the regional rodent, regional bird, etc. I think every single base game regional dex in every single region that appears from now on should be constructed similarly to BW2 Unova, Kalos, Alola, and Galar, I don't care what was available in the original game, we have over 900 Pokemon now and pretending like 90% of them don't exist for nostalgia is extremely regressive and needlessly archaic. I want a remake that feels more like what the game would've been made like if it was made today, not how it was back in the day with some graphical touchups and minor QoL improvements. A remake doesn't serve its purpose well if it remakes its flaws alongside its merits.

 

[UxieLover1994]

Yeah, they'll probably do it and restrict you to just the 5th gen Pokemon in the main story (and maybe just the BW2 additions in the post game), but I also won't get such a game.

Another issue is type diversity if the BW remakes go the way of LGPE, since the only Generation V Fairy-types are Cottonee and Whimsicott. Going the BDSP route does have Clefable, Gardevoir, and Togekiss as options, but only post-game, and still no option to evolve Eevee into Sylveon.

 

[Totem_Rowlet]

You get way too many encounters in caves, especially when on a bike. The chibi art style makes it look like one of the Who Was books we all read when we were kids, and the gigantic lack of fire types all make it bad. And everything about the elite four everyone says is completely true. Plus no platinum dex.

 

[henrymidfields]

Most people have already mentioned why faithful remakes are a bad idea, so I won't go into too much detail. While I haven't played the game myself yet, the stories I hear does sound very discouraging.

I think not rectifying shortcomings of the original DP was a bad idea of its own. To be fair, HGSS wasn't exempt from it either, considering the weird level curve it still had, but at least that tried to compensate by adding a lot of stuff. Same with ORAS; I admit that had a lot going on in its favor, and that's from someone who had (and to some extent still has) a particular prejudice against RSE/ORAS. My particular strikes and batter-outs against BDSP was the retention of the type-unfaithful party members for important trainers, the lack of Pokemon variety for certain types that should be more common, and the lack of any Gen 5+ Pokemon - particularly Gen 5+ evolutions of Gen 1-4 Pokemon, and any Gen 5+ Pokemon from Legends: Arceus. Also...what's the story with the inconsistent difficulty between E4/CHampion and everyone else that I'm hearing?

 

[Bolt Strike]

Another issue is type diversity if the BW remakes go the way of LGPE, since the only Generation V Fairy-types are Cottonee and Whimsicott. Going the BDSP route does have Clefable, Gardevoir, and Togekiss as options, but only post-game, and still no option to evolve Eevee into Sylveon.

Yes, I alluded to type diversity problems in my post. But it goes far beyond Fairy, which didn't exist at the time. Many other types are lacking sufficient variety for the NPC rosters or monotype players to be able to create a full team. Rock, Poison, Ice, and Ghost all have less than 6 families, and that list gets even longer if you take into account starters, legendaries, and version exclusives (Electric, Ground, Fighting, and Dragon would also be insufficient under those conditions). BW Unova's type diversity is just plain not enough. 150 Pokemon simply is not enough to provide that kind of variety, in fact the only dexes that do are 300 or more (I'm not sure if that's mathematically the absolute minimum necessary, but every dex we've had that's less than that has had some kind of variety issue).

 

[There Is No Arceus]

Yes, I alluded to type diversity problems in my post. But it goes far beyond Fairy, which didn't exist at the time. Many other types are lacking sufficient variety for the NPC rosters or monotype players to be able to create a full team. Rock, Poison, Ice, and Ghost all have less than 6 families, and that list gets even longer if you take into account starters, legendaries, and version exclusives (Electric, Ground, Fighting, and Dragon would also be insufficient under those conditions). BW Unova's type diversity is just plain not enough. 150 Pokemon simply is not enough to provide that kind of variety, in fact the only dexes that do are 300 or more (I'm not sure if that's mathematically the absolute minimum necessary, but every dex we've had that's less than that has had some kind of variety issue).

mathematically, the minimum amount of dex entries required for a full team of 6 for every type is 54. of course, that's assuming they're al single stage pokemon and they're all dual-type to get exactly 6 of every type.