ads are seriously harmful though. especially for children.

that being said i'd get rid of it if it weren't for youtube. when red comes to canada i'll buy it.

I'm glad we're all agreeing gen 4 is HORRIBLE, BECAUSE IT IS!!!

Slow, worst faction, etc.

Only two things worth mentioning are Cynthia, and her theme




also off note, Gardevoir seems to be the one pokemon every loves across gens.

gen 4 is better than gen 3 and 6

i would say gen 5 too but it's been so long since i played i dont feel qualified

I can also completely understand shutting off animations in Gen IV. Those games made battles so fucking slow for no reason.

i must have formed the habit of turning them off in gen. 4, then.

Quote from: Prehistoric on August 28, 2016, 05:27:27 PM

Actually I always turn battle animations off. I don't really care for them.

It's hard to play Pokémon wrong, but... jeez...

Slows down the game too much. I'm not one of those people who tries their darnedest to NOT get in Pokemon battles. I like to defeat every trainer possible in the entire game.

So as a result I end up wasting a lot of time looking at the Thunderbolt animation for the millionth time.

how the fuck does he have that much play time. I thought I've played this game way too much and I only have like 8 days

Functionality is only half of a game. Not to mention that it isn't even the half that sells.

This is a conversation about game quality. Sales don't matter, either.

Sorry, but games are not one sided. Like any art form they have many different facets, and none of them can be weak.

Yeah, sure. But graphics are different from aesthetics.

Crystal is lacking in features compared to newer releases.

Aside from maybe Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire, G/S/C still have the most content in a Pokemon game.

It's lacking compared to today's games yeah but still

has as much to do as x/y, if not more

I'm beating a dead horse here, but whether or not you, personally, appreciate something does not change whether or not it is important.

Graphics don't matter because they don't alter functionality.

Just because you appreciate it does not change whether or not it is important.

Games have to be beautiful as well as functional, I've never bought into the stupid indie 8-bit fad, its almost never charming.

8-bit games can be beautiful, but games do not need to be beautiful.

I don't like the indie game fad either, but those games suck for reasons other than "they look old".

There is absolutely no excuse for delivering a lazy product when you can bring so much more to the table, Crystal would be a high school project today, albeit an A+ project.

Because it doesn't look nice? That's idiotic. 

My favourite thing about gen. 1 is that it allows for so much team diversity, type-wise at least. In some of the later generations I feel shoe-horned into similar teams on multiple playthroughs. But that's not the case in Kanto.

Quote from: Prehistoric on August 27, 2016, 11:40:28 PM

i think games should be compared to a universal standard regardless of when they came out

gold and silver arent worse games because they came out a long time ago and dont have the improvements made later on

but red and blue were just broken games at the start with a promises idea and a flawed execution

A universal standard sounds good until you realize that the bar continues to get raised all the time. You might not like the 3D models for the new Pokémon games, but they're generally considered to be "better" than the old sprites--and they're only going to get even better and more detailed as time goes on. Generation VI, to me, would easily be my favorite generation if I wasn't a stubborn nostalgic baby.

So while I say that my favorite generation is the second one, I know in my heart that it's probably not the best.

Obviously, there's no objectivity in this, but my point is that it's hard to have a universal standard when there's theoretically no limit to how good games can get. Therefore, if a mind-blowingly awesome game that's ten or twenty levels above the best game you've ever played comes out, that means your ex-favorite game of all time is now a little bit worse. What you thought was a 10/10 has now been dropped to an 8/10 due to rising standards.

There's no way you could've foreseen that, but technically, it can.

i don't see the bar being raised at all. the only thing that's been improved in modern years is graphics and what is actually capable with the technology -- but neither of these things have generated anything really astounding, save maybe one or two games.

utilising the tools of the time and creating something spectacular within those limits is what makes a game good. just because the tools get better over time doesn't mean the products do too.

i'm just saying

aside from one comment it's literally just you talking in here

dude no one really cares unless it's your first time playing through the game

i generally find reading pretty boring so after i feel like i understand the concepts in the book fully i stop reading it altogether

not really

i'm pretty much the exact same thing

the only thing that changes is people's perception of me

radical everything is better

i hate fence-sitting gray-area fuckers