Man, my tastes and that of the NWR staff are just not in sync.  I found Ruby/Sapphire to be an incredibly underwhelming sequel to the point that X/Y will be my entry point back into the series (so I'm not qualified to do a top five but I can compare Ruby/Sapphire to Gold/Silver).  Gold/Silver however is a fantastic example of what I want out of a Nintendo sequel: it takes the first game and greatly expands the scope, adding all sorts of new ideas to the concept.  Gold/Silver has the realtime day/night cycle, the expanded Pokegear, the ability to trade with older games, Pokémon breeding, two new Pokémon types, and then they let you replay the entire world from the first game.

Despite being its sequel Ruby/Sapphire is ironically less featured than Ruby/Sapphire as it lacks the realtime day/night, doesn't offer any old world from the earlier games, introduces no new Pokémon types (which would become the norm but at the time that seemed very lazy to me) and doesn't let you trade with the old games (despite the GBA being fully capable of playing GB/GBC games).  No, instead you have to buy a remake of Red/Blue to get the old Pokémon.  I'm sure that was just a technical limitation and the obvious benefit of Nintendo selling you another game was just coincidental.  The most notable new feature of Ruby/Sapphire is the double battles but those show up so infrequently that it comes across as superficial, like Nintendo half-heartedly shoved it in to create the illusion of newness.  Hell the graphics and sound aren't even much of an upgrade.  Ruby/Sapphire seemed like a step back from Gold/Silver.

I meant Ruby/Sapphire is less featured than Gold/Silver in the first sentence of my second paragraph.  This no-editing things is really annoying!

Heartgold/Soulsilver is hands-down the best pokemon game ever made.

Unless spinoffs or remakes are included, then there are only five games anyway, so this is just ranking the generations.

Pokémon Gold was my first game and it's still the one I enjoyed the most by far. A large part of that is because everything about it was fresh, whereas all the sequels had little new, and a lot of what they changed was stuff I didn't like. I also did play Blue directly after that, but it felt pretty archaic after playing the superior Gold.

This poll on GameFAQs paints an interesting picture. I suspect that most people are like me, and the first game in the series they played is still their fave.

Ian, I think Nintendo went with not letting you trade prior gens in R/S/E was because there was more money in the Gen I remakes.

That poll Mop posted just shows that nostalgia, above all else, reigns supreme. There also could be the added impact of not being a school kid when the new Pokemon game comes out, so you aren't surrounded by people to trade, battle, and share tips with.

If we're ranking the Gens, I'd go with IV, V, II, III, I. I only put the third over the first because of the Gen I remakes.

Also, for the record, HG/SS are the best games; and Crystal version had story elements.

Bah ruby was the best! But i've got to agree with Oblivion soulsliver was good though.. pokealton!

The way the background data worked for the Pokémon in Red/Blue/Gold/Silver was different to how they implemented it in Ruby/Sapphire, which is why they could not be traded. I guess they could have just flagged what Pokémon it was and then just give you a quite rough estimation on what the new values would be though.

there were also some technical things on the way the gba games would connect to the older ones i believe

Added back in Emerald.

You're memory must be hazy of Gold/Silver. While yes, it did have Kanto, Kanto was a shell of it's former self. Very bland and boring compared to Johto. The reason? Having two overworlds is very hard to do on a Gameboy. Ruby/Sapphire was such a large graphical overhaul I seriously doubt they be able to do them any sort of justice without making a new ga-oh wait.

The only reason two new ones were added in Gold/Silver was because Psychic was overpowered as fuck. Adding those two types balanced it out. Why add more when by that time, everything were perfectly balanced?

*facepalm* The entire infrastructure of the series was revamped in Ruby/Sapphire. The things they added made the code between the two games impossible to trade with. To complain about this is fucking stupid.

*double facepalm* Double battles, more weather, natures, abilities, running shoes, Dive, etc. are just things that slipped your mind? Hell, just the addition of natures and abilities turned the entire metagame on it's head and remains to this day the biggest change to the series besides the addition of online play from Gen 4 and the Dark and Steel types from Gen 2.

Now you're just trolling.

http://i.imgur.com/TPqnCbT.gif
http://i.imgur.com/tUN2Ydm.jpg


You sure love those rose-colored glasses, huh?

:confused;  Really!? Ruby, sapphire, and emerald is better than silver, gold, and crystal wow I'm just gonna say I strongly disagree, while ruby and the rest of those were not the worst they definitely were not better than silver especially storyline wise, how could they be better than a game that just has so much more the continuation from red and blue over to silver and gold is great, the fact that you can travel over to kanto and battle the gym leaders there, there was just so much story. I'm sorry I just do not see ruby being better than silver but I also wouldn't have ruby at number 4 or silver at 5, they are definitely not the worst of a top 5 pokemon games definitely better than diamond or pearl, if you list diamond or pearl higher than silver and ruby or even red then I know this review is based solely on  graphics and little new things added here or there to develop something new to the pokemon games. again sorry for the long rant but in my mind no pokemon game has lived up to silver except for soul silver still love to play them though and cannot wait for X and Y

You have no taste!
Ruby is the BEST!
If any says other wise they'll cope a Focus Blast to The face!

Do you just like Gen III because that's the one where Lucario was introduced?

I'll admit that I forgot double battles were a Gen III thing, but I don't really remember liking them that much at first. Same with triple battles. I do like rotation battles though.

never got that special event... first met a baby riolu when riley gave me a egg! Best day of my life!

My god, why are so many people on this site Pokemon n00bs? nickmitch, Lucario was introduced in Gen IV.

If it weren't for Smash Bros I wouldn't even know who Lucario was. Not everyone cares enough to memorise every single Pokémon and the 'gen' they emanated from. I mean, honestly; who has the time?

The answer is 'nerds'.

Lucariofan didn't even realize this.

I actually think that ironically Oblivion's screenshots demonstrate my point.  That looks exactly like I remember.  It's like the same size sprites with more colours.  Everything has this square grid look to it like some SNES launch game.  The GBA is capable of much better and Nintendo had released better looking GBA games by the time Ruby/Sapphire was released.  It looks like the bare minimum graphic upgrade they felt they could get away with.

The point about everyone's favourite Pokémon game being their first probably explains why the series has evolved very slowly.  I was a few months away from 17 when Red/Blue came out so I was a little old at the time but my brother was 12 which was a perfect age.  He has all the main Pokémon games and loves the series but agrees that the series evolves slowly.  But he's been there since the beginning so all these new games seem like sequels that don't expand the concept that much.  Nintendo probably thinks of each game more as the first game for a new group of kids, instead of a typical sequel for an existing audience.

Ironically,

For all that Ruby and Saphire did, it was the first Pokemon mainline game I didn't beat and when I lost interest in the series.

just like it was in gold and silver, heck you hold gold and silver to such a high standard but graphically they literally colored in the existing overworld sprites from red/blue/yellow and called it a done deal.

and this was game freaks first GBA game, your point?

it's still not as bad as g/s and we are just talking about the overworld

or it could come from nostalgia.

the series does evolve slowly, but you seem to be grossly exaggerating how slowly it has grown

and thats a little something called buisness. what's your point

My only regret with X/Y is that it's going to be until December and the PokeBank launch before I can transfer over my living Pokedex to Gen6.


Fave game of the series (so far) would go to Diamond -- simply because it's the one I truly started with.  I had a copy of Blue that I bought on my honeymoon . . . but I wasn't about to be "that 23 year old guy asking 9-10 year olds to trade Pokemon".  So I shelved the series until they added online trading.  I mean, I GOTTA catch em all, right?

Really?! I swear to Arceus my memory just ain't what it used to be.

I feel like you're going out of your way to disagree with Ian. G/S had to be playable on the GB, so the graphics thing is understandable. Gen II did a lot more with the actual formula than R/S/E did, which I think is his point.

His point was clearly made; you're pointlessly making excuses.

These are mutually exclusive thoughts. Your first game is your fave because of nostalgia. Nintendo sees people liking each game so much, so they are reluctant to make major changes.

The point is trying to explain why the series evolves so slowly. It's not really a "point" though.

The last mainline Pokemon game I fully got into was HeartGold. I hadn't played the original Gold/Silver/Crystal games.


Currently, I'm really liking the 3DS Pokemon Mystery Dungeon game, like, more than I anticipated I would.

I still have to question the game with the half-assed region tacked onto a 16th-of-an-assed region getting on the list TWICE.

But as long as Black/White is #1 I will be happy.

#1 is pokemon crystal :smug:

I did he was a special event first!

i hate unova pokemon they are... ahem. but black and White two was better then the first!

Nickmitch, I already explained why his assertion that Gen III didn't improve the formula as much as Gen II. Ian is simply wrong, and pokepal is just reaffirming this.

Wrong. Google is your friend. He was never a special event in Gen III.

The only gen 3-relevant thing involving Lucario was that you could get a statue of him in the first set of Pokemon Mystery Dungeons, which otherwise were gen 3 rules.

How can ruby and Saphiree beat Gold and Silver when Gold and Silver despite being an expansion pack has the better style, sidequests, and post game content.

I'll give you that double battles were awesome and abilities are cool too, but I didn't like abilities at first since it just didn't seem like there were that many of them. Natures only really mattered if you were overly hardcore about it. For a passing fan, you really only see double battles as a natural set up and abilities as a nice surprise.

Ha ha ha, just because you don't like something doesn't mean it was a huge change. Natures didn't only affect the "hardcore". You're honestly telling me what you got an Alakazam (Abra) whose nature increased Attack and decreased Special Attack, you didn't try and catch another one?


Double battles aren't only "cool" they are the only way official tournaments are played these days. The single battle rule doesn't have as many random possibilities as having four pokemon on the field at once.


There were A LOT of abilities in Gen III, and now that excuse doesn't even matter in Gen VI.

"Official tournaments" are one of those things that doesn't affect average Pokemon fans, but I see your point.

As for the natures, trying to get a Pokemon with the right nature/ability was one of those things that I felt kept me from playing the actual game. And yes, I'm honestly telling you that thing about Alakazam because I never trained one. Natures always felt like (and still do) something that I had to research and not explore on my own through playing the game. I imagine this is a reasonable thing for a person to feel and would cause one to consider that upgrade to the formula a bit negligible.

As for abilities, I just felt that every electric type had static, ever fire type had flame body or flash fire, all bugs had compound eyes, and a handful of Pokemon had (then-)unique (to their evolutionary lines) abilities.

Oh, okay. I understand your complaints a little better in that regard and I definitely can see your point. I don't know how well you followed the series after Gen III but Gen IV and V definitely improved the things you did not like.


With natures, I'm not sure if that was Gen IV or V but currently the stat screen tells you which stat the nature effects. IIRC, in Gen IV they change the color of the affected stats to show this and in Gen V they explicitly tell you. Stop me if I'm wrong, however.


And yeah, abilities have definitely gotten more varied. If you're ever curious, check out Serebii's Gen V ability list and you'll see how much we have these days. And it's only gonna get larger by midnight tonight.

Yeah, I think Gen III was the only gen I didn't follow closely. Could be the source of my complaints.

According to Bulbapedia, I think HG/SS did the color code for natures first. (Again, why those are the best.)

And yeah, abilities have gotten way better. That's something I'm willing to debate myself over and capture multiple monsters for.

First I find it interesting that the original Zelda was not even in the Zelda top ten, and Pokemon Red/Blue/Yellow is number 1. Don't get me wrong I'm not complaining as I've only played Blue and none other so I'm clueless.


Second, I enjoyed Blue (but I haven't played it since about 1999) and I'm considering getting Y, but I'm wondering if I'm going to be lost or if it's been done such that I can start fresh with Y and be able to follow all the dynamics of the game (I know they've added features with each edition).

I figured Red and Blue was going to be the co-op #1, but Gold and Silver are the best. Only one where you get 16 badges to go through, so much more game. I mean come on guys. And Pokemon Snap is good, but in the top 3?

How about you guys do a vote on the website for the fans to see what we think?

I think that's a big reason. The people on staff who have played/enjoyed those games across the series aren't the same people.

Gotta disagree with the #1. First, I feel that Yellow should be treated separately from Red and Blue. It gives you a special starter, all three regular starters, and changes a few other pieces about the game. May be the most differentiated "3rd Version". Second, this just feels like a nostalgia pick. :P

Really? Gen I as the best of the series?

NWR, this is the first time I am disappointed in you.

Any list with Gen I at number 1 is a complete joke.  I know it's a combination of the staffs votes, but the fact that that many people had Gen I that high on there list is beyond sad.  Just proves why Nintendo is smart not to listen to fans since many of them are blinded by nostalgia to the point of insanity.  There isn't a single thing Gen I does that the later games didn't do better.  Gold/Silver alone which came out only 2 years later already made Gen I feel outdated back in 2000, since Gen II improved every single aspect of the gameplay to a point it's impossible to go back.  Every Pokemon after has used Gold/Silver as a template because that's the game that really turned Pokemon into what it is today. 

This would be like making a Mega Man Top 10 and putting MM1 at Number 1 over MM2 and MM3.  It doesn't matter if Red/Blue/Yellow came first, Gold and Silver took what they did and did it better in every way possible with the later games continuing what Gold/Silver started.

I feel the original Pokemon games are great, but they move too slowly in comparison to the better entries in the series.

It's funny how we were talking about people tending to associate their first Pokémon game as their favourite and then NWR does exactly that.  With only five games to choose from you guys picked a spin-off and a remake of a game that appeared earlier in the list.  Does it even make sense to pick Red/Blue when Fire-Red/Leaf-Green is effectively a more polished take on the same thing?

My earlier statement about my tastes and the NWR staff's not jiving holds up.  Red/Blue is a good game that is still pretty damn playable but it just seems like a very odd choice for number one when its sequels have polished and refined the concept.  Unlike movie series, the first entry is rarely the best one for videogames.

While I'm a fan of Gold/Silver as the best.  I think it is right to give it to Red/Blue because at its core you could take a player who has only played the current newest X and Y 2.  Plop them down with Red/Blue and they be right at home.

Well, as a few of them mention, they still play Red and Blue to this day while it seems everyone commenting on the forum has moved on. That's probably a big factor and is more than just nostalgia.

Let's be honest. The NWR staff making this is a very very small group compared to the amount of people who play Pokemon. This is the list that group has come up with. Now, if we were to take another group of people the same size out of all of those millions of other Pokemon players, we'd probably get another completely different list. And so on and so on.

People act like the lists NWR posts are somehow definitive and that Nintendo is going to etch them on stone tablets so that for all time these lists will be the proper ranking of the game. It's just a fun excercise of a few passionate people getting together to talk about a subject and see what happens when they all compare their opinions to see what then fares well and what doesn't.

Everybody knows Hey You, Pikachu! is the real #1.

I can't say I'm surprised to see Red/Blue as number one, I probably should have officially predicted that in my first post here.

Also, I'm glad that spin-offs and remakes were included, and that Pokémon Snap was chosen. It may be over quickly, but it's a really fun game and concept. Hopefully, Nintendo revisit it, because there's a lot of potential there especially with modern hardware.

Lucario and the mystery of mew!
Gen III Movie with Lucario in it
WRONG!

You're really are something special. Okay, I'm going to make a special fucking Google trip for you since you don't seem to like to see reason.


http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Lucario_(Pokémon)


Read this article. Everywhere is references Gen IV and beyond, and nothing of the earlier Gens.


http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/M08

Just because they released an anime movie during a certain Gen (because in case you haven't noticed, the anime and games are completely seperate entities) doesn't mean the new Pokemon in it belong to Gen III and was introduced in it. A movie not made by Gamefreak doesn't fucking count. Because if what you said was the case, Ho-Oh appearing in the first episode of the anime would make him a Gen I pokemon correct? No, his national dex number is #250. Not one of the original 151.


http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/List_of_in-game_event_Pokémon_in_Generation_III


I also wasn't aware that a anime movie was a "special event" in Gen III. You keep talking about this special event where you could get Lucario in Gen III and I can't seem to find it anywhere. Mind giving me a source for your claim? Because according to this link, Lucario was not a event pokemon in Gen III.


Mind giving this a rest now and moving on? You lost, brah.

we all make mistakes oblivion, as to lucario a actually thought that.

Fact: the reason why ash has stayed 11 for like forever is this,
Pokedex entry for Ho-oh says that however sees it is granted extended life and eternal happiness and what did ash see in the first episode?

Ash is still ten because it's a fucking cartoon.

yes true but the creators were smart when they made it ::)

ha

This is a forum for adults.  Mild swearing isn't grounds for reporting a post.

Wait, did he report my use of the word "fuck" in my rant? Or was it nickmitch's? Either way...


http://www.midwestsportsfans.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/mj-laughing.gif

Don't assume you know who reported it. :D

BUG DESTROYS PKMN Y/X SAVEFILES


Your collection of pocket monsters is potentially at risk.
A small number of Pokémon X and Y gamers are reporting that saving in a certain area of the world causes the game to freeze, and rebooting the 3DS does not fix the issue. After the initial bug, the game loads the save and then immediately freezes again.
We’ve reached out to Nintendo to confirm if this glitch is real and if it plans to release a bug-fixing patch. We’ll update this post with any new information.
The Pokémon trainers reporting this bug claim that it happens when saving in the outside streets area of Lumiose City, one of the major hubs. The error causes Pokémon X or Y to hard-lock, and the player can only regain control of the system by holding down the power button. You can see how the game freezes even after loading the save in a video uploaded to YouTube:

A few gamers reported the issue in a thread on gaming message board Gamefaqs. The glitch seems to affect both digital and physical copies of both X and Y. Until Nintendo issues a patch, it is probably wise to avoid saving in Lumiose City.source: venturebeat.com

sorry, i just can not find the edit button ...

http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/18007/article/pokemon-x-and-y-get-the-details-on-the-lumiose-city-save-glitch/

so don't save when you see a taxi...?

Pretty much ::)