• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Are the pokemon generations getting worse as they go along?

KillerDraco

KillerDraco

Well-Known Member
KantoPkmnMaster said:
They did have a value. 1/8192. Look it up. The Masuda method in generation 4 effectively made this value 5/8192, and chaining shiny pokemon could effectively increase the encounter rate to a ludicrous 1/200. And no, i would not have them shut down the GTS or eliminate the good components to shut out the bad components. The good people need not suffer for a couple of bad apples.
Click to expand...

...That's not their value, that's their probability of appearance. He's referring to the subjective value that people apply to them, despite the fact that, color scheme aside, there is no difference between a shiny and a regular Pokemon.
 
BCVM22

BCVM22

Well-Known Member
Wrong kind of value entirely. Gold has a value. Jewels have a value. The value is what they're actually worth - what the market says someone should pay for them.

Shinies never had that. Ever. They had a rarity, which has decreased, and while rarity and value are linked they aren't at all the same. At no point were we ever told "a Shiny is worth this much", which is something that actually would make them less valuable with the greater probability of finding one. But again, that was never once the case.
 
K

KantoPkmnMaster

Banned
KillerDraco said:
...That's not their value, that's their probability of appearance. He's referring to the subjective value that people apply to them, despite the fact that, color scheme aside, there is no difference between a shiny and a regular Pokemon.
Click to expand...
I was thinking numerical value in terms of probability, didn't mean for that to be misconstrued.
 
Last edited:
M

Mythicalzoe

Badass
No they are getting better,the sixth gen would have been fine if they had made 150 new pokemon instead of being lazy with these 70 ones.
 
E

Endolise

TengenToppaBoogaloo
Mythicalzoe said:
No they are getting better,the sixth gen would have been fine if they had made 150 new pokemon instead of being lazy with these 70 ones.
Click to expand...

It wasn't lazy at all. It was incredibly strategic.
 
C

CliveKoopa

Well-Known Member
I used to think that and most of my favourite pokemon are all in the earlier generations. However, I grow to like current generations and start to like them all equally.
 
Tangeh

Tangeh

Well-Known Member
I think they're getting better! Gen VI is my favourite by far. :) And I started with Gen I. I didn't care much for Gen V, though. Still don't, really. I remember when they revealed the starters and zorua / zoroark and genuinely loved them albeit zoroark was reminiscent of lucario, but I had high hopes for the generation due to a good first impression. Maybe that's why I was so disappointed...? Some of the pokemon designs were downright ugly and weird and while I appreciated the idea of being able to go into the game completely fresh, my excitement to find new pokemon dwindled very quickly. Yes, Gen I was no better, but that was the starting point and every other generation improved on it imo. Granted I never bothered with B2/W2.

...but other than Gen V (which I'd still place above Gen I) I think they've all improved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top