Topic: Top 5 Pokémon Games: I Choose You!

[NWR_Neal]

We roll up our sleeves, throw some Pokéballs and try to order them all.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/feature/35565

Figuring out our refined favorite five Pokémon games was no easy task, involving some internet slap fights, a few terse sarcastic remarks, and the occasional Quick Attack. We emerged through that time with a list of five Pokémon games that we feel are the best of them all.

Note that we count a generation as a game, so for example, Gold, Silver, and Crystal are counted as one game. Also, we did include spin-offs, and someone even made a play for including Super Smash Bros. Melee (which actually got more votes than Pokémon Black 2 and White 2).

I can assure you that Melee missed the Top 5 and that all of the following games include the word "Pokémon" in their name. Hope you enjoy our list, and if you think we're right or wrong, let us know in the comments.

[Pixelated Pixies]

[insert 'they're all the same game' joke here]

[Ian Sane]

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.

[Ian Sane]

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!

[Oblivion]

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

[Mop it up]

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.

[nickmitch]

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.

[Wah]

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

[Traveller]

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.

[pokepal148]

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

[Oblivion]

it lacks the realtime day/night,

Added back in Emerald.

[/size]doesn't offer any old world from the earlier games,

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.
[/font]

[/size] introduces no new Pokémon types (which would become the norm but at the time that seemed very lazy to me)

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

[/size] and doesn't let you trade with the old games (despite the GBA being fully capable of playing GB/GBC games).

*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.
[/font]

[/size]The most notable new feature of Ruby/Sapphire is the double battles

*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.
[/font]

[/size]Hell the graphics and sound aren't even much of an upgrade.

Now you're just trolling.





You sure love those rose-colored glasses, huh?

[Oblivion]

it lacks the realtime day/night,

Added back in Emerald.

doesn't offer any old world from the earlier games,

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.

introduces no new Pokémon types (which would become the norm but at the time that seemed very lazy to me)

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

and doesn't let you trade with the old games (despite the GBA being fully capable of playing GB/GBC games).

*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.

The most notable new feature of Ruby/Sapphire is the double battles

*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.

Hell the graphics and sound aren't even much of an upgrade.

Now you're just trolling.





You sure love those rose-colored glasses, huh?

[Bamaboy]

   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

[Wah]

  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!

[nickmitch]

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.

[Wah]

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

[Oblivion]

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

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

[Pixelated Pixies]

My god, why are so many people on this site Pokemon n00bs?.

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'.}

[Oblivion]

Lucariofan didn't even realize this.

[Ian Sane]

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.

[Ceric]

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.

[pokepal148]

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.

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.

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.

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

It looks like the bare minimum graphic upgrade they felt they could get away with.

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

The point about everyone's favourite Pokémon game being their first probably explains why the series has evolved very slowly.

or it could come from nostalgia.

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.

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

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.

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

[DrHogie]

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?

[nickmitch]

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

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

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

[nickmitch]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

The point about everyone's favourite Pokémon game being their first probably explains why the series has evolved very slowly.

or it could come from nostalgia.

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.

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.

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

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