Unpopular opinions

[Pikachu315111]

I like that the Gym Leader & Elite Four specialize in a type and honestly I think if they really tried they could make for tougher challenges.

In my thinking, if the Gym Leader just employed a type of strategy of had another theme I don't think they would be that rememberable (at least to me, I don't know about you though I can generally name all members of a Pokemon League due to their type specialty). They would feel like just a harder version of any trainer out on a Route (which is the Ace Trainer's gimmick). Them based off a type also helps in the creativity process, matching (or subverting) things that would match their type of expertise be it their design, Gym puzzle, Elite Four room, etc.. And since Types is one of the main things Pokemon is known for it makes sense to base the game bosses around that.

And it's not that a mono type is bad, you just need to have a good strategy which is where the Gym Leaders/Elite Four fail at. Sometimes they'll use a gimmick but most often they're just given Pokemon of their type to use. Don't usually use weather, don't use certain gimmicks and traits related to that type, they just send the Pokemon of their type out there without any thought of setup. And with that all said, just cause they specialize in a type doesn't mean they can't have a Pokemon of another type that covers that type's weakness (it's honestly something you'd expect an expert of a type to do, make sure the opponent is playing by their rules).

 

[Taistelu]

I like that the Gym Leader & Elite Four specialize in a type and honestly I think if they really tried they could make for tougher challenges.

In my thinking, if the Gym Leader just employed a type of strategy of had another theme I don't think they would be that rememberable (at least to me, I don't know about you though I can generally name all members of a Pokemon League due to their type specialty). They would feel like just a harder version of any trainer out on a Route (which is the Ace Trainer's gimmick). Them based off a type also helps in the creativity process, matching (or subverting) things that would match their type of expertise be it their design, Gym puzzle, Elite Four room, etc.. And since Types is one of the main things Pokemon is known for it makes sense to base the game bosses around that.

And it's not that a mono type is bad, you just need to have a good strategy which is where the Gym Leaders/Elite Four fail at. Sometimes they'll use a gimmick but most often they're just given Pokemon of their type to use. Don't usually use weather, don't use certain gimmicks and traits related to that type, they just send the Pokemon of their type out there without any thought of setup. And with that all said, just cause they specialize in a type doesn't mean they can't have a Pokemon of another type that covers that type's weakness (it's honestly something you'd expect an expert of a type to do, make sure the opponent is playing by their rules).

I disagree but it's probably mere preference. I feel like they'd be more memorable if there was a common theme to the team that wasn't a type. I would remember them for the challenge they provide and the unique idea behind the concept. A Monotype team is at a disadvantage when facing a diverse Pokemon team (in terms of types), so even if that E4/Trainer has a beautifully crafted mono team it'll still die to the same 1 or 2 Pokemon. Of course, while Type Diversity is an issue there's another issue that also makes Gym Leaders fail. How many Pokemon they have. While mabye Gyms 1-3 have an excuse for being the beginning Gyms the other Gyms don't. 6v3/4 limits Pokemon diversity and does not pair well with the previously stated Monotype theme. I mean they should have five Pokemon, if not a full team. I also wish E4 Members had a full team but I feel like I'm straying away from the main matter. While Monotype teams can work, it's easier and more effective to make a Gym Leader work with diverse typing and another theme.

 

[Kurona]

I wish the Teachy TV would come back.
Because you can stick the tutorial for catching Pokémon on that, meaning you're not forced to sit through it at the start of the game.

 

[Darth Manaphy]

My only problem with the Teachy TV is that I kept accidentally pressing L and R during the game bringing up the Teachy TV menu which ended up slowing the game even more.

 

[Taistelu]

I wish the Teachy TV would come back.
Because you can stick the tutorial for catching Pokémon on that, meaning you're not forced to sit through it at the start of the game.

Actually not a bad idea. I never used it myself but yeah...when it was used there was still a catching tutorial in game so idk how they would go about that. There should also be a "Skip Tutorial" option of some kind, not sure how this would be implemented but a cool feature to have.

 

[Kurona]

My only problem with the Teachy TV is that I kept accidentally pressing L and R during the game bringing up the Teachy TV menu which ended up slowing the game even more.

You can make the LR buttons do nothing from the options menu. Or have L=A which I always seem to enjoy.

 

[Darth Manaphy]

You can make the LR buttons do nothing from the options menu. Or have L=A which I always seem to enjoy.

Wait. That was a thing? Holy Shit! This changes like 10% of the problems with those games. Still doesn't do much with the fact that the games feel super slow compared to other Gen III titles and that the bicycle is completely pointless outside of cycling road.

 

[Kurona]

Wait. That was a thing? Holy Shit! This changes like 10% of the problems with those games. Still doesn't do much with the fact that the games feel super slow compared to other Gen III titles and that the bicycle is completely pointless outside of cycling road.

It's been a thing for, like... every game since Ruby and Sapphire, yeah.
They always felt pretty fast for me.

 

[Taistelu]

Wait. That was a thing? Holy Shit! This changes like 10% of the problems with those games. Still doesn't do much with the fact that the games feel super slow compared to other Gen III titles and that the bicycle is completely pointless outside of cycling road.

I never knew that existed either lol

EDIT: Bicycle should be faster imo in all games

 

[HelenTheHero]

I don't like how in RSE/ORAS you have two bikes. While it makes sense, I found it tedious and annoying to fly back and forth to get a bike just so I can enter an area of the safari zone. Even getting both at the same time is annoying when guides don't show the exact location of a trainer so you can get it.

 

[Lady Vader]

I don't like how in RSE/ORAS you have two bikes. While it makes sense, I found it tedious and annoying to fly back and forth to get a bike just so I can enter an area of the safari zone. Even getting both at the same time is annoying when guides don't show the exact location of a trainer so you can get it.

In ORAS, you can actually get both bikes after you talk to certain trainers. Makes life a lot easier.

Yes, I can see how (sadly) it would alienate new players, but in that case...why not make the Elite Four based upon strategies instead of types? Once you have 8 Gym Leaders under your belt I would say you're probably experienced enough by that point. I mean come on, they're meant to be the toughest trainers in the region, yet some can be beaten with a single Pokemon (for example in ORAS I swept the Dark Type E4 with Dustox Bug Buzz, type advantage or no, this "elite" trainer just lost to a common bug). I mean if the Champion does it (for most games) why can't the E4? It's not like the Champion has to have a multi-type team to show their the "leader", it's shown through higher levels, superior movesets and the challenge they're meant to provide, but sadly the whole "monotype" thing looks like it's here to stay.

I like that the Gym Leader & Elite Four specialize in a type and honestly I think if they really tried they could make for tougher challenges.

In my thinking, if the Gym Leader just employed a type of strategy of had another theme I don't think they would be that rememberable (at least to me, I don't know about you though I can generally name all members of a Pokemon League due to their type specialty). They would feel like just a harder version of any trainer out on a Route (which is the Ace Trainer's gimmick). Them based off a type also helps in the creativity process, matching (or subverting) things that would match their type of expertise be it their design, Gym puzzle, Elite Four room, etc.. And since Types is one of the main things Pokemon is known for it makes sense to base the game bosses around that.

And it's not that a mono type is bad, you just need to have a good strategy which is where the Gym Leaders/Elite Four fail at. Sometimes they'll use a gimmick but most often they're just given Pokemon of their type to use. Don't usually use weather, don't use certain gimmicks and traits related to that type, they just send the Pokemon of their type out there without any thought of setup. And with that all said, just cause they specialize in a type doesn't mean they can't have a Pokemon of another type that covers that type's weakness (it's honestly something you'd expect an expert of a type to do, make sure the opponent is playing by their rules).

I agree with both. Most of the in-game monotype teams do really suck, yet even if that wasn't the case, it would be nice to see an Elite Four that does something different. For example: there are four weathers...

 

[HelenTheHero]

In ORAS, you can actually get both bikes after you talk to certain trainers. Makes life a lot easier.


I agree with both. Most of the in-game monotype teams do really suck, yet even if that wasn't the case, it would be nice to see an Elite Four that does something different. For example: there are four weathers...

That's what I was referring too. I had difficulty with a guide (Possibly from Serebi?) and could never find the one bird trainer. I still don't have both bikes.

 

[Lady Vader]

That's what I was referring too. I had difficulty with a guide (Possibly from Serebi?) and could never find the one bird trainer. I still don't have both bikes.

Try this guide. It should work better.

 

[stage7_4]

Man, I take a weekend to go to a bachelor party and all the juicy un-pop's come out. Guess I better rethink my priorities? ;p

Welp, since partying way too hard seems to be my regret of the week, let's just bang some of these out all at once:

1. Defensive in-game: It works great on bosses/gym leaders and Coliseum/XD, but for the rest of the game not so much. It's really just a mechanical flaw, not necessarily the pokemon. Doubles is pretty self-explanatory, but in singles Defense is only "efficient" when you've got something worth stopping (like a full party of 6 mons, or one super-mon and it's 5 supports, etc.) but no common trainer ever really provides justification to use one (Veterans and Ace trainers rarely have over 3 pokemon, and the only 6's you ever really see are fishermen and bird boys). One pro for defensive pokemon, it is way easier to do X-item set-ups for Elite Four/Champion sweeps than with a frail but fast/strong 'mon just because the chip damage means more turns to boost up before needing to heal.

2. Bulbasaur's popularity: so subjective. I don't think he's ever been flat unpopular, just maybe overshadowed by his peers Blastoise and especially Charizard. He's always had the niche as the easy-mode choice (or the safe bet if you're a nuzlocker) simply because sweeping the early-game gives him such a level advantage that the harder sections for him (Sabrina, Blaine, Koga without a coverage move) become less hard. But in honesty, he doesn't have that big a lead. Charmander and level grind on bugs in the forest, and Squirtle gets Brock and Mt. Moon, just Bulbasaur gets Brock, Mt. Moon, Misty, and argueably Lt. Surge too.

3. Bring our frontier back: It was touched on that the Maison's return in ORAS wasn't loathed for being the Maison itself (I personally loved how streamlined it made battle challenges, and for giving rotation and triples more time to shine) but for how lazy it is. Yeah, Emerald's Battle Frontier had a bunch of flaws to it (Battle Palace was just awful, Battle Pike and Arena were so-so, and Battle Factory you either love it or loathe it). But we really wanted to see if they could update and polish it so that the real fun could shine more, just like what the Maison did to the Battle Tower/Subway. And I would love to see the Pyramid and Castle from Gen 4 return.

4. GSC Kanto Blues: Kanto's stripped down form was due to space limitations, interviews have confirmed that they wanted to have full content (like the Safari Zone) but just couldn't do it. Due to GSC being the first sequel game, and new regions not really being established with the fanbase yet (oh jeebus the flame wars when R/S first came out and most of the old pokemon were missing) they were in a catch 22: cut Kanto completely, or bring back as much as they could? Personally I think they should have put more effort into Johto (some of those routes were really short), but I can't say if I'd make that choice back in 2001 if I was a game designer.

5. "Unpopular Opinions": Despite the title, it's really just what we think is unpopular not whether it is or isn't, and that's not even getting into how fickle popularity is (take all the ups and downs the fandom has with Lucario for example). But "I feel insecure about my opinion and need confirmation that other people like it too" was too wordy. And no offense implied, I'm guilty as charged too.

 

[Kurona]

The thing with Pokémon is... due to all the games being very similar, there's not a single main game the majority of the fanbase agrees "yeah that's crap" and hence saying you like a particular main game isn't an unpopular opinion.
Like, Sonic has Sonic 06 and Shadow (the game). Mario has Mario Sunshine. Metroid has Other M. Mega Man has Mega Man 8 and if we expand beyond Classic Mega Man X7; Transformers has Energon and something so disgusting I dare not utter it's name (it's not the movies. The movies are awful but what I'm talking about is far, far worse than anything michael bay could do).
And there's usually some pretty obvious reasons why these are bad - notoriously glitchy games, awful quality control, horrific graphics, doing something that's so against what previous games were about... Pokémon never has that. It always plays safe and follows the same pattern to such an extent that even if you're tired of it, it's not technically a bad game because it's just the same game as the one you played before just a little different. Because they play it so safe and go by the same engine (aside from Gen 3 creating a new one), there's not really much room for glitches and bad quality control - it's always built on the very safe foundations of previous games. Graphics are also usually not a problem, they usually play safe as well - the only thing in Pokémon main games people even think of pointing to as bad graphics is Gen 4 because of it's bad use of 3D, and you'd be hard-pressed to call those games ugly - sure the 3D isn't the best but it's not horrific either. Because they're all so samey, no Pokémon game has been so bad that the entire fandom reviles it.
So when someone says "I like Gen ___ unlike most everyone else", it's very inaccurate because there's almost no majority agreeance which you can tell because every time someone says it, they say a different Gen. Gen 4 is probably the one most people would point towards but I constantly see a lot of love for it everywhere to the point that even if the criticisms they're going against were legitimate, I have a hard time finding people who actually do hate Gen 4. Some people come out and say "I loved Hoenn unlike everyone else"... but if it was so hated, why was everyone going on about wanting a Gen 3 remake? If it's so hated it's not something that gets that much support for a remake. Sonic 06 wouldn't get that support. Megaman X7 wouldn't get that much support. But Hoenn did. Gen 5, again, I see a ton more support for that gen than I ever see people hating on it.
I just always roll my eyes when I see "I liked Gen __" on this thread because... it's not an unpopular opinion. Maybe saying anything other than Gen 1 was your favourite isn't very common, but saying you liked it... that's something that's pretty common. None of the main games have a focal point of hatred many other popular game series have.

 

[stage7_4]

The scenario you are describing is called "moving the goalposts" or "unpopular by comparison."

While "I like X, unlike everyone else" is definitely not true, "I like X despite it being the least popular of set Y" is the spirit of what they are saying. So there's nothing wrong with saying, "it's the least popular game, but I like B2W2." It's human nature that given any set the individual parts will be measured against each other, even if they are better than anything outside of the set. Take any pokemon that's been forced out of OU just for being outclassed by another 'mon, but still really really good at it's job. This is no different.

Bottom line, this thread flies on probably one of the most ambiguous, loose, and undefined premises on the entire O.I. board. Not that this is a bad thing, just that there's a lot more freedom of opinions than other topics. "Unpopular" can mean just about anything if you've got a silver tongue.

 

[Kurona]

The scenario you are describing is called "moving the goalposts" or "unpopular by comparison."

While "I like X, unlike everyone else" is definitely not true, "I like X despite it being the least popular of set Y" is the spirit of what they are saying. So there's nothing wrong with saying, "it's the least popular game, but I like B2W2." It's human nature that given any set the individual parts will be measured against each other, even if they are better than anything outside of the set. Take any pokemon that's been forced out of OU just for being outclassed by another 'mon, but still really really good at it's job. This is no different.

Bottom line, this thread flies on probably one of the most ambiguous, loose, and undefined premises on the entire O.I. board. Not that this is a bad thing, just that there's a lot more freedom of opinions than other topics. "Unpopular" can mean just about anything if you've got a silver tongue.

Yes, but even then, what is the least popular game?

 

[Taistelu]

Mario has Mario Sunshine.

Sunshine is actually decently popular, had to pick up on that, sorry

 

[stage7_4]

Yes, but even then, what is the least popular game?

A mystery for the ages.

Heck, it's not even the same game at any point in time but always changing.

 

[Codraroll]

Yes, but even then, what is the least popular game?

Japanese Green, I think. It's so completely outshone by the rest of the Gen I games, simply because Green is widely accepted to have the worst Pokémon sprites out of all games. Never have I ever seen anybody say "It's a pity that game was only released in Japan". Not even the Virtual Console re-releases bothered to give Green a translation, and few if anybody complained.

As for the least popular core series game released internationally... I don't think there is a consensus. Pokémon is a series which gives you pretty tinted nostalgia glasses, so the first game you played will always remain one of your favourites. All the games have been good enough to give players worldwide many hours of entertainment. If I were to single out any specifics, I think Diamond and Pearl enjoy the least popularity on Smogon. There appears to be a solid consensus that Platinum did everything so much better than them, that D/P can safely be skipped if you play Platinum instead. Platinum fixed some of D/P's issues with regards to Pokémon selection, story pacing and a few other quality-of-life features if I recall correctly. D/P had flaws that were so notable because Platinum fixed them, so to say. People say similar things about Emerald in regards to R/S, though. It may be that D/P are better games than R/S, strictly speaking, but the latter wins many over because of its wonderful, colourful art style, graphics that match and fully utilize the capabilities of its hardware, and iconic music. Hoenn is a tropical adventure, Sinnoh is dull and drab, so I dare say the atmosphere of R/S is superior to that of D/P.

But yeah, I think it stands between R/S and D/P on here. They're recent enough for the majority of users to have played them and given their judgement, and their flaws can't be excused by "early installment weirdness". Myself, I lean towards D/P as the worse games, but I know many people feel differently about it.

 

[Lady Vader]

Japanese Green, I think. It's so completely outshone by the rest of the Gen I games, simply because Green is widely accepted to have the worst Pokémon sprites out of all games. Never have I ever seen anybody say "It's a pity that game was only released in Japan". Not even the Virtual Console re-releases bothered to give Green a translation, and few if anybody complained.

As for the least popular core series game released internationally... I don't think there is a consensus. Pokémon is a series which gives you pretty tinted nostalgia glasses, so the first game you played will always remain one of your favourites. All the games have been good enough to give players worldwide many hours of entertainment. If I were to single out any specifics, I think Diamond and Pearl enjoy the least popularity on Smogon. There appears to be a solid consensus that Platinum did everything so much better than them, that D/P can safely be skipped if you play Platinum instead. Platinum fixed some of D/P's issues with regards to Pokémon selection, story pacing and a few other quality-of-life features if I recall correctly. D/P had flaws that were so notable because Platinum fixed them, so to say. People say similar things about Emerald in regards to R/S, though. It may be that D/P are better games than R/S, strictly speaking, but the latter wins many over because of its wonderful, colourful art style, graphics that match and fully utilize the capabilities of its hardware, and iconic music. Hoenn is a tropical adventure, Sinnoh is dull and drab, so I dare say the atmosphere of R/S is superior to that of D/P.

But yeah, I think it stands between R/S and D/P on here. They're recent enough for the majority of users to have played them and given their judgement, and their flaws can't be excused by "early installment weirdness". Myself, I lean towards D/P as the worse games, but I know many people feel differently about it.

You can't separate Green from Red as they are the same game. They share the same problems. The reason we didn't get a translation of Green is that it would just have been our Blue, but with the Red/Green engine and sprites. And due to the similarities, an actual Japanese Blue would be pointless as well.

We were lucky that Red, Green, and Blue got fused into a simple paired version. Ditto on Stadium. That and it kept us from having to deal with Blizzards with a 30% freeze chance on top of 90% accuracy. Yes, Japanese Red, Green, and Blue has 30% freeze chance Blizzard. International Red and Blue as well as all versions of Yellow have the now-standard 10%.

 

[Gokuzbu]

Fire Red and Leaf Green seem forgotten, they don't even get brought up to be hated on, which might be even worse than the complaints about DP. At least people talk about DP. I thought they were fine games but played it too close to the original. The HGSS route of adding a million and one new content/features seems more popular with fans than being faithful to the originals (to the point you can't even evolve your Golbat)

 

[Kurona]

Firered and Leafgreen are forgotten? Huh?

 

[Darth Manaphy]

Yes, but even then, what is the least popular game?

Actually...let's try this out with this poll: http://www.strawpoll.me/10174910

Everyone, let's take this poll!

 

[The Manifold Curiosity]

Fire Red and Leaf Green seem forgotten, they don't even get brought up to be hated on, which might be even worse than the complaints about DP. At least people talk about DP. I thought they were fine games but played it too close to the original. The HGSS route of adding a million and one new content/features seems more popular with fans than being faithful to the originals (to the point you can't even evolve your Golbat)

Yes I agree with you about this one, especially with the VC release of the original RBY. FRLG were honestly quite poor games, they added virtually nothing of content to the originals except the running shoes and a proper colour pallet. The Sevii Islands are only interesting after the first visit and after the extended Team Rocket story they have little else interesting to contribute. FRLG are so close to the originals that they actually remove features that were present in Ruby/Sapphire such as day and night, Contests, the ability to evolve your Golbat, breeding etc. until post game where you get some of those features back. Compare this to HGSS or ORAS where they actually add new and very popular features and keep everything the base generation games had. I can't help but think how bored I was playing those games and that I might as well be playing the originals. When I bought LG many years ago I genially thought I would be able to get gen 2 Pokemon such as Umbreon and Golbat during the play-though (like how I could get mamoswine in HGSS before I get the national dex) and I was massively disappointed when I found out that was not the case. Had I known that at that time I would not have bothered wasting money on it.

FRLG was a necessity at a time when you could not import your gen 1 and 2 Pokemon into gen 3 so they did a remake with the bare minimum added. Now with the ability to play the original RBY there is zero reason for me to ever play FRLG as the former gives you the nostalgia fix while the latter brings nothing worthwhile to the table. So yeah if FRLG aren't forgotten now they definitely will be over the next few years.