• 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

What makes some people think that Pokemon is going downhill

Skiks

MUCH RESPECT
If Blaziken had Speed Boost, I would use him.
He does now thanks to dreamworld.
I feel like your avoiding the question.
I'm not really the concept of a pokemon also relies on how it's stats and moves work. What would a pokemon be without it's fire type abilities when it's clearly a fire type? What would a Rock pokemon be without it's defensive stats? But if you wish to clarify your actual intend idea feel free. I'm telling you the stats and moves are part of the process for making a pokemon.

Oh, but I do care about the good things. The good things are what keeps me playing it, but I will not be content.
Also you didn't answer my question.
I can but clarify it more if you want because I already mentioned I could critize the entire generation of games easily but there are things they do that keep me happy.

Okay, now I have another question, how can health be measured and why do some Pokemon have more health then others?
Health can be measured by base value pokemon are assigned.
As you can see in this dex page Blissey has some high base HP:
http://serebii.net/pokedex-bw/242.shtml
Pokemon are given health depending on what they are intended to be in battle. If they want a decent tank like pokemon they give it good defense and HP. If the pokemon is an attacker with high speeds it's given lower HP because making a pokemon fast, strong, and very bulky would throw away the balance they're trying to make. Or at least the balance they're trying to salvage since gen 1. Shuckle's problem is how attack damage is calculated in the game. Despite it's amazing defensive stats on both sides it's HP is so low you can't really say it's of any use. HP just happens to effect defensive power a lot more then most realize.
Legendaries are the only ones that are intentionally broken because of their status as legends. Thats not to say some normal pokemon become too good but for the most part legends usually end up with insane attack powers and in many other stats they are better then most. Interestingly enough Mewtwo is still pretty darn powerful for all 5 gens even with Arceus around.
Of course this doesn't mean that some legends won't end up sucking due to typing, move pool, or stats. Some actually end up doing really poorly even against normal pokemon. Maybe this is on purpose so that you get used to the difficulty of capturing said legends. Like say Entei is a warm up before you go after Suicune or Raikou.
 
Last edited:

Kim62

Hello
I'm not really the concept of a pokemon also relies on how it's stats and moves work. What would a pokemon be without it's fire type abilities when it's clearly a fire type? What would a Rock pokemon be without it's defensive stats? But if you wish to clarify your actual intend idea feel free. I'm telling you the stats and moves are part of the process for making a pokemon.
I can see what your getting at, but that doesn't really affect a individual Pokemon's concept (which is what I'm talking about) it just effects the concept the groups, in which Pokemon are categories in, has.
I can but clarify it more if you want because I already mentioned I could critize the entire generation of games easily but there are things they do that keep me happy.
Okay, here's another question then:
Out of each generation, what percentage of each generation fulfilled your needs? (ex. if you said 75% for generation 1 that means that 75% of the game met your expectations)
Health can be measured by base value pokemon are assigned.
As you can see in this dex page Blissey has some high base HP:
http://serebii.net/pokedex-bw/242.shtml
Pokemon are given health depending on what they are intended to be in battle. If they want a decent tank like pokemon they give it good defense and HP. If the pokemon is an attacker with high speeds it's given lower HP because making a pokemon fast, strong, and very bulky would throw away the balance they're trying to make. Or at least the balance they're trying to salvage since gen 1. Shuckle's problem is how attack damage is calculated in the game. Despite it's amazing defensive stats on both sides it's HP is so low you can't really say it's of any use. HP just happens to effect defensive power a lot more then most realize.
Legendaries are the only ones that are intentionally broken because of their status as legends. Thats not to say some normal pokemon become too good but for the most part legends usually end up with insane attack powers and in many other stats they are better then most. Interestingly enough Mewtwo is still pretty darn powerful for all 5 gens even with Arceus around.
Of course this doesn't mean that some legends won't end up sucking due to typing, move pool, or stats. Some actually end up doing really poorly even against normal pokemon. Maybe this is on purpose so that you get used to the difficulty of capturing said legends. Like say Entei is a warm up before you go after Suicune or Raikou.
...............
I was talking in terms of how it would work in a real world setting but now that I think about it, its kind of silly to ask that (please don't throw a wall-o-text at me again).
 

Skiks

MUCH RESPECT
I can see what your getting at, but that doesn't really affect a individual Pokemon's concept (which is what I'm talking about) it just effects the concept the groups, in which Pokemon are categories in, has.
You could see that way however you can't avoid that the pokemons concept will make some sense with it's stats ore movepool. I'm pretty sure at least that much is considered when making one. Say if a pokemon is made to look strong we get things like Machamp.
Okay, here's another question then:
Out of each generation, what percentage of each generation fulfilled your needs? (ex. if you said 75% for generation 1 that means that 75% of the game met your expectations)
Generation 1 kicked things off but it doesn't age to well with me. I'm 50 50 with this gen. I liked the ideas it had not how it was used. Also the glitches and brokenness of this gen turned me off completely from it's metagame.
Generation 2 built on Gen 1 and improved more became more colorful in it's designs probably because of the graphic changes. The towns and areas were clearly on a classical japanese region then the last one. Noticeable by some of the buildings as well as the pokemon and trainers. Gen 2 was pretty pleasant as well as the surprise trip back to Kanto. I'd say maybe 60% because I felt the need to complete the game on all levels. It also added Shinies which shows that there was some push to make things a little more interesting. I also found the metagame in this gen rather fun.
Gen 3 was a good try on new ideas for the franchise and adding on abilities pokemon now use today. As well as fixing the concept of each pokemon is an individual by using IVs and EVs in a different manner. However the surfing really made me bored and the diving factor defintely needed more uses. Diving to find items and going back up is not really what I'd call exploration. More could have been done here.
Gen 4 was a golden time for me. DP gave me a metagame that was finally something that gave every pokemon a fair shot at being good. Everyone gained moves they could use within their typing, whether they had better attack or special attack. The Graphics finally looked really good. I'd say 75%. It defintely felt better then other generations. Even the characters seemed more fleshed out then a typical game.
Gen 5 really hit some good notes with me by just taking the current metagame and extending it to higher levels. It's overall an improved Sinnoh to me but with a more modern feel. I haven't immersed myself in it yet but from what I've seen it's probably gonna be higher then DP in terms of my liking. I won't grade it yet because I'd like to play it for myself.
...............
I was talking in terms of how it would work in a real world setting but now that I think about it, its kind of silly to ask that (please don't throw a wall-o-text at me again).
Yeah pretty much. I mean on gaming terms it makes sense. But if you want realism some pokemon seem like they can take more anyways. Some with flimsy frames may have less HP then those that are bulky or fat like Snorlax.
 

Skydra

Well-Known Member
Okay, here's another question then:
Out of each generation, what percentage of each generation fulfilled your needs? (ex. if you said 75% for generation 1 that means that 75% of the game met your expectations)

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I'll answer it because I find it interesting and doubt anyone cares it was directed to someone else.

Gen 1-Not graded, haven't played it. FRLG was good, so I think this would be about 50% because of the balance issues and less replay value than the following games.

Gen 2- I haven't actually played it, but based on how much I liked HGSS I'd say this was a good one. Probably about 70% if I ever take the time to play it.
Gen 3- 75%. Enough to warrant (many)multiple playthroughs but needed a larger sidequest, like Kanto in 2nd gen. Coliseum and XD add an extra 10% to this gen because they were awesome. Started in this gen. Also liked being able to play through Kanto in the Kanto remake.
Gen 4- 80%. Would be 70% without Heartgold, 85% if they had made a Wii RPG that actually had an adventure. Was glad they took the time to add in the Battle Zone, and especially glad that Platinum had Gym Leader rematches. Battle Revolution was disappointing. Underground was a fun activity, and contests were improved.
5th Gen- Looking like 70-85% right now, but I'm not sure. Musicals look better than Contests, and the Dream World appears to be awesome. Glad they took the time to make new Pokemon to replace old returners like Machop and Zubat. The Pokemon are good except I still don't like Jaroda's stats.
 

AncientMew

Training since 1998
We should make a poll! Over are the 5th Gen pokemon good or rubbish? I want to know what the balance is.
 

BCVM22

Well-Known Member
We should make a poll! Over are the 5th Gen pokemon good or rubbish? I want to know what the balance is.

The weakest dogs bark the loudest. You'd find that more of the people who have convinced themselves that the new designs are 100% "rubbish" (or "don't look like Pokémon" or "look too much like old Pokémon" or "look like Digimon" or whatever other noise people like to shout these days) would be more vehement about their ill-conceived beliefs than those who don't really have a problem with the designs as a whole.
 

AncientMew

Training since 1998
But the poll means that everyone gets one equal vote, the weakest dogs barking the loudest applies here because they can post multiple times and in caps! But a poll would give us a better veiw
 

RedMage23

The Red Mage
People just need time to get used to the new Pokemon. I don't hear anyone complaining about the Generation IV Pokemon anymore (except for Bidoof, but he doesn't take sh*t from nobody)
 

Dark Eevee

Well-Known Member
People just need time to get used to the new Pokemon. I don't hear anyone complaining about the Generation IV Pokemon anymore (except for Bidoof, but he doesn't take sh*t from nobody)
And when gen 6 is announced they'll complain about those pokemon as well.
There's no pleasing the idiots.
 

Kim62

Hello
Generation 1 kicked things off but it doesn't age to well with me. I'm 50 50 with this gen. I liked the ideas it had not how it was used. Also the glitches and brokenness of this gen turned me off completely from it's metagame.
Generation 2 built on Gen 1 and improved more became more colorful in it's designs probably because of the graphic changes. The towns and areas were clearly on a classical japanese region then the last one. Noticeable by some of the buildings as well as the pokemon and trainers. Gen 2 was pretty pleasant as well as the surprise trip back to Kanto. I'd say maybe 60% because I felt the need to complete the game on all levels. It also added Shinies which shows that there was some push to make things a little more interesting. I also found the metagame in this gen rather fun.
Gen 3 was a good try on new ideas for the franchise and adding on abilities pokemon now use today. As well as fixing the concept of each pokemon is an individual by using IVs and EVs in a different manner. However the surfing really made me bored and the diving factor defintely needed more uses. Diving to find items and going back up is not really what I'd call exploration. More could have been done here.
Gen 4 was a golden time for me. DP gave me a metagame that was finally something that gave every pokemon a fair shot at being good. Everyone gained moves they could use within their typing, whether they had better attack or special attack. The Graphics finally looked really good. I'd say 75%. It defintely felt better then other generations. Even the characters seemed more fleshed out then a typical game.
Gen 5 really hit some good notes with me by just taking the current metagame and extending it to higher levels. It's overall an improved Sinnoh to me but with a more modern feel. I haven't immersed myself in it yet but from what I've seen it's probably gonna be higher then DP in terms of my liking. I won't grade it yet because I'd like to play it for myself.
Gen 1-Not graded, haven't played it. FRLG was good, so I think this would be about 50% because of the balance issues and less replay value than the following games.

Gen 2- I haven't actually played it, but based on how much I liked HGSS I'd say this was a good one. Probably about 70% if I ever take the time to play it.
Gen 3- 75%. Enough to warrant (many)multiple playthroughs but needed a larger sidequest, like Kanto in 2nd gen. Coliseum and XD add an extra 10% to this gen because they were awesome. Started in this gen. Also liked being able to play through Kanto in the Kanto remake.
Gen 4- 80%. Would be 70% without Heartgold, 85% if they had made a Wii RPG that actually had an adventure. Was glad they took the time to add in the Battle Zone, and especially glad that Platinum had Gym Leader rematches. Battle Revolution was disappointing. Underground was a fun activity, and contests were improved.
5th Gen- Looking like 70-85% right now, but I'm not sure. Musicals look better than Contests, and the Dream World appears to be awesome. Glad they took the time to make new Pokemon to replace old returners like Machop and Zubat. The Pokemon are good except I still don't like Jaroda's stats.

Just as I had suspected...
 

Skiks

MUCH RESPECT
Just as I had suspected...
Your point? I give a pretty fair chance for all gens to win me over. I do still like playing through the old games but they aren't my one true love or anything.
 
Last edited:

Kim62

Hello
Your point? I give a pretty fair chance for all gens to win me over. I do still like playing through the old games but they aren't my one true love or anything.
I didn't really have a point, I was just trying to confirm my suspesions.

Honestly, do you think that people who dislike the new games don't give them a fair chance?
 

Skiks

MUCH RESPECT
I feel it's either that or they just don't find the main points of the game all that interesting. I mean if you're looking for a good story or something mind blowingly new compared to the last gen, this isn't your type of game. Pokemon is more like a progressive game that updates itself every gen just very slowly. They throw in a bunch of toys we can play with and give us a nice little sandbox to explore. They also remake games now and add the current gen fixes without trying to lose it's flavor. Funny enough FRLG didn't stand out to well with me and confirmed to me it really wasn't all that good. Even with a superior build it was rather bland. Sure I enjoyed a trip down memory lane but it just didn't hold up well. I felt different about HGSS it just held up so much better. Not sure if it was the generation fix or just that it had a better taste to me then gen 1. But whatever they did it worked.
 

RedMage23

The Red Mage
I thought FR/LG were just as good if not better than RSE (and that's coming from someone who didn't play Red/Blue until after he played Silver)... and HG/SS were certainly better than Diamond and Pearl...
 

Skydra

Well-Known Member
Honestly, do you think that people who dislike the new games don't give them a fair chance?

I do. "The new Pokemon are crap" is a kind of saying people use before the next generation before they have given themselves time to get used to them.
 
HG/SS= WIN(9.0)

D/P= 8.0

Platinum= 7.5

Red/Blue (Original)= 8.0

FR/LG=7.0 (Boring)

R/S/E= 9.5 for Region, 5.5 for New Pokemon introduced for Gen 3.

G/S/C=8.5

That's my opinion
 

Skiks

MUCH RESPECT
I thought FR/LG were just as good if not better than RSE (and that's coming from someone who didn't play Red/Blue until after he played Silver)... and HG/SS were certainly better than Diamond and Pearl...
It's just me being ugh about Gen 3 probably. The reason I want an RSE remake is in the hope that they fix the issues I have with it. It didn't help RBY while a good start wasn't something I'd give 5 stars or anything.
 
Top