Topic: Top 5 Pokémon Games: I Choose You!

[Phil]

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.

[Shaymin]

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.

[pokepal148]

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

[Wah]

Lucariofan didn't even realize this.

I did he was a special event first!

[Wah]

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.

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

[Oblivion]

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.

Lucariofan didn't even realize this.

I did he was a special event first!

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

[Shaymin]

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.

[shingi_70]

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.

[nickmitch]

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.

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.

[Oblivion]

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.

[nickmitch]

"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.

[Oblivion]

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.

[nickmitch]

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.

[Leo13]

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).

[xcwarrior]

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?

[MegaByte]

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.

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.

[nickmitch]

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.

[the asylum]

Really? Gen I as the best of the series?

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

[Luigi Dude]

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.

[Phil]

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

[Ian Sane]

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.

[Ceric]

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.

[Khushrenada]

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.

[MegaByte]

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

[Mop it up]

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.