Alex Culafi and Justin Berube explain their polar opposite views on Pokémon Ruby & Sapphire.
Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire launched on the Game Boy Advance back in March 2003. These games marked a new beginning for the Pokémon franchise in many ways, and due to this fact, it remains one of the most controversial Pokémon games in the series.
With the November release of Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire on the horizon, it has sparked much discussion about the old games they are based on. NWR Previews Editor Alex Culafi thinks Ruby & Sapphire are the best Pokémon games in the series, while Features Editor Justin Berube thinks they are the worst. Read through both of their opinions and then be sure to chime in with your thoughts in the comments section below.
I like how one-sided this article is- one person has a falling out with Pokemon because Ruby and Sapphire sucked and the other enjoys every aspect that made the game insufferable.Who's harping? Is it that unreasonable that two people end at two justifiable, opposing ends of the spectrum? And where is the one side?
Why is Ruby and Sapphire the worst pair of Pokemon games? Well, in trying to "diversify" it's versions it came up with two equally lame evil organizations with the most ridiculous schemes ever. There are far more duds in R/S than any other entry and it started the overcomplicated design trend that the series has only recently eased up on. The region and it's ridiculous obsession with water still end up being extremely bland, even though they tried really hard to make it interesting with weather choices, which wouldn't be well-implemented until the next generation.
I understand that people try to defend something they like staunchly even when it's widely regarded as subpar, but I would have preferred more opinions from more writers on these games. If you're going to have two people argue why a game is good or bad, I'd like to hear more variation than harping on all the reasons it's bad.
I like how one-sided this article is- one person has a falling out with Pokemon because Ruby and Sapphire sucked and the other enjoys every aspect that made the game insufferable.who says the remakes won't try to fix these things.
Why is Ruby and Sapphire the worst pair of Pokemon games? Well, in trying to "diversify" it's versions it came up with two equally lame evil organizations with the most ridiculous schemes ever. There are far more duds in R/S than any other entry and it started the overcomplicated design trend that the series has only recently eased up on. The region and it's ridiculous obsession with water still end up being extremely bland, even though they tried really hard to make it interesting with weather choices, which wouldn't be well-implemented until the next generation.
I understand that people try to defend something they like staunchly even when it's widely regarded as subpar, but I would have preferred more opinions from more writers on these games. If you're going to have two people argue why a game is good or bad, I'd like to hear more variation than harping on all the reasons it's bad.
I like how one-sided this article is- one person has a falling out with Pokemon because Ruby and Sapphire sucked and the other enjoys every aspect that made the game insufferable.
I also feel that this argument is cheap, which is why I called for more variety in the feature. If kind of just feels like a lazy editorial.QuoteI like how one-sided this article is- one person has a falling out with Pokemon because Ruby and Sapphire sucked and the other enjoys every aspect that made the game insufferable.
How is Justin's argument better? It basically boils down to: "I couldn't transfer my Pokemon from older games and they didn't just put the same old Pokemon in a new region. Therefore Ruby and Sapphire suck. Q.E.D."
The article simply states that, if you're the kind of person who likes all the things that weren't well-received by the majority of Pokemon fans in Ruby and Sapphire, you liked Ruby and Sapphire.
excuse me if I feel something that parrots the popular opinion of a game with an added "but I liked them" is a weak argument, or one that could be expanded upon.
I also feel that this argument is cheap, which is why I called for more variety in the feature. If kind of just feels like a lazy editorial.
I just get sick of all the article bashing.
The article simply states that, if you're the kind of person who likes all the things that weren't well-received by the majority of Pokemon fans in Ruby and Sapphire, you liked Ruby and Sapphire.
People still bitch and moan about me saying Super Mario 3D Land is the worst 3D Mario of them all and giving legitimate critique, so excuse me if I feel something that parrots the popular opinion of a game with an added "but I liked them" is a weak argument, or one that could be expanded upon.
I feel a forum discussion is better for this type of subject because then we could see the variety in people's opinions of the game. This just doesn't seem to warrant a full article, but that's just my OPINION. It's still going to stay on the site, I was just merely commenting on it.
may have felt a bit watered down at times
Also as for the Silcoon/Cascoon comparison...
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Nidoran%E2%99%82_%28Pok%C3%A9mon%29 (http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Nidoran%E2%99%82_%28Pok%C3%A9mon%29)
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Nidoran%E2%99%80_%28Pok%C3%A9mon%29 (http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Nidoran%E2%99%80_%28Pok%C3%A9mon%29)
See those two Pokemon above? They're different Pokemon. They couldn't be bothered to come up with different names, so they just put a tacky Male or Female symbol in the name. Truly awful.
The Nidorans look different though, Silcoon and Cascoon don't.
The Nidorans are only separate Pokemon because gender wasn't in Gen I. Silcoon and Cascoon both evolve from the same Pokemon, so it makes sense that they look similar.