Just one of those things where people loved the idea of it and glossed over the execution.
I admit I sometimes have a hard time separating criticism of Johto from criticism of GSC.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
I admit I sometimes have a hard time separating criticism of Johto from criticism of GSC.
But what if, and hear me out, both kanto and johto are mid?
Okay, but hear me out. I've played games that have included all regions, which in this case is FRLG, Yellow, LGPE and HGSS for kanto and johto, and both are not really spectacular, I don't think any pokemon region is spectacular. Even Hoenn, which is the region I grew up with cause my first game was ORAS, is only alright. But Kanto and Johto especially are not good, the others are at least alright.
Kanto sadly falls victim to the fact that unless you know the game, i.e. you have played the games beforehand, you will not know where to go, you just kinda have to guess. Despite the fact that I knew what route you kinda have to go, the game doesn't even have a recommended route of 'you should go here, but you could also go here', its entirely in the players hand. Now, this may not seem bad, but the zero guidance or story means that newer players don't know where to go. Everything else about it is alright, the map layout is cool, but again, you are not guided upon a path and given the option of something else.
Johto on the other hand, is not really good of a region. Sure, there are a few cool things, such as it looping around on itself, but at the end of the day, you are going back and forth between areas and they don't really feel impactful or necessary. You have to get medicine for the ampharos by going to cianwood town (the town where chuck is, if I'm wrong on the name) to go back to the same town by flying. Backtracking should be fun, but it isn't because you get to surf, something which isn't really good in pokemon games in general because they refuse to make interesting water obstacles outside of hoenn, which even then isn't too interesting outside a few routes (the whirlpools are so small they barely count), and thus make the treck there boring. You do get fly in the town, but again, why not just have you fight jasmine and then fight chuck? That seems a lot easier. And then the team rocket stuff happens and you have to go to goldenrod, completely breaking the immersion of the game by going to a previous location unorganically. And then once that's done, you go about your business. Don't even get me started on the level curve, that's the worst part and shows how split paths have to be handled carefully.
Okay, but hear me out. I've played games that have included all regions, which in this case is FRLG, Yellow, LGPE and HGSS for kanto and johto, and both are not really spectacular, I don't think any pokemon region is spectacular. Even Hoenn, which is the region I grew up with cause my first game was ORAS, is only alright. But Kanto and Johto especially are not good, the others are at least alright.
Kanto sadly falls victim to the fact that unless you know the game, i.e. you have played the games beforehand, you will not know where to go, you just kinda have to guess. Despite the fact that I knew what route you kinda have to go, the game doesn't even have a recommended route of 'you should go here, but you could also go here', its entirely in the players hand. Now, this may not seem bad, but the zero guidance or story means that newer players don't know where to go. Everything else about it is alright, the map layout is cool, but again, you are not guided upon a path and given the option of something else.
Johto on the other hand, is not really good of a region. Sure, there are a few cool things, such as it looping around on itself, but at the end of the day, you are going back and forth between areas and they don't really feel impactful or necessary. You have to get medicine for the ampharos by going to cianwood town (the town where chuck is, if I'm wrong on the name) to go back to the same town by flying. Backtracking should be fun, but it isn't because you get to surf, something which isn't really good in pokemon games in general because they refuse to make interesting water obstacles outside of hoenn, which even then isn't too interesting outside a few routes (the whirlpools are so small they barely count), and thus make the treck there boring. You do get fly in the town, but again, why not just have you fight jasmine and then fight chuck? That seems a lot easier. And then the team rocket stuff happens and you have to go to goldenrod, completely breaking the immersion of the game by going to a previous location unorganically. And then once that's done, you go about your business. Don't even get me started on the level curve, that's the worst part and shows how split paths have to be handled carefully.
I think there are a lot of different ways that you can argue that Kanto is lacking compared to what came after it (it's pretty basic), but this isn't one of them. And the older I get, the more I'm inclined to think that games of this style could use less directional guidance, not more.
Pokemon has always been a game for barely-literate children, and those of the late '90s could still brute force their way through it. You don't need a whole lot of direction. Routes are small, secret areas are few and far between, there aren't that many key items needed for map progression, and those that exist have only so many places where they could be found. The most obtuse one is probably the Flash HM, and that's something that actually isn't technically required and at least some players in RBY don't even like to use anyway because of the lack of a move deleter in gen 1.
Like I remember just scrolling through the list of all of the areas on the Town Map in RBY, and the order in which they are listed in the map is like ~95% matched to the order in which you're expected to traverse them over the course of the quest. Didn't take a lot of intuition or experimentation.
I love that, for all the hate it gets, no one is debating Hoenn. Because yeah, it's just good. The first 5 gyms are a legitimately fun pathfinding experience, and post-surf the game is all about letting you decide how much or how little you want to explore the water routes. There's issues, sure, but given the generation and tech available, Hoenn was a gold standard region design. And the mons are similar. Sure there's issues(all the non-Geodude/Marshtomp grounds are available AFTER Wattson), but it had interesting designs and refreshing takes on the standard concepts.
Anyways Mt Coronet is excellent and I wish the rest of Sinnoh was anywhere near that level.
Anyways Mt Coronet is excellent and I wish the rest of Sinnoh was anywhere near that level.
Vespiquen is honestly good. I've been using it in an LP (was also fortunate enough to get Munchlax too). Munchlax soloing Fantina is incredibly funny to me.
idk my opinion on sinnoh is simpler: its not that fun
the choices of sinnoh arent fun. i dont like most of these designs and if im replaying a pokemon game id like to run a bit of variety otherwise whats the point. croagunk toxicroak carnivine brozong gastrodon vespiqueen is basically all i run cuz everything else is so mid. im not even talking abt trade stuff cuz i play on emulator i can just hack those yknow
the routes arent fun. theyre samey and uninspired and the color pallete of sinnoh feels off to me. the hms make travelling a chore.
yeah gen 4 battles slow etc. i run on 2x speed who cares. however the gym leaders dont give me any joy other than fantina and sometimes crasher wake. they feel forgettable and bland. their designs arent nearly as good as gen 3s for sure.
the plot is a plot. i get what they were going for but i find it falling. the main thing it has going on is shock bc blowing up a lake and the giratina summon are pretty cool jumps. i just dont find galactic that interesting or well explored, same with cynthia and cyrus.
idk. its a very "i can just play another pokemon game" game
the choices of sinnoh arent fun. i dont like most of these designs and if im replaying a pokemon game id like to run a bit of variety otherwise whats the point. croagunk toxicroak carnivine brozong gastrodon vespiqueen is basically all i run cuz everything else is so mid. im not even talking abt trade stuff cuz i play on emulator i can just hack those yknow
the routes arent fun. theyre samey and uninspired and the color pallete of sinnoh feels off to me. the hms make travelling a chore.
yeah gen 4 battles slow etc. i run on 2x speed who cares. however the gym leaders dont give me any joy other than fantina and sometimes crasher wake. they feel forgettable and bland. their designs arent nearly as good as gen 3s for sure.
the plot is a plot. i get what they were going for but i find it falling. the main thing it has going on is shock bc blowing up a lake and the giratina summon are pretty cool jumps. i just dont find galactic that interesting or well explored, same with cynthia and cyrus.
idk. its a very "i can just play another pokemon game" game
Ima be honest, I Really Did noy enjoy Shining pearl Because of it being a game, But Because of it being Pokémon. The game is only nice in some ways After The league when You Can fille use The underground, The legendary catching park and the battle tower. The scénario Is a pain, and the fact that Legend Arceus, Better in All points comes 3-4 months After Is Really not helping it.
I think disliking BDSP is not really a controversial opinion. That game was ass. They looked at all the improvements that Platinum made and said 'nah, that ain't good".
It's one of the only mainline pokemon games I haven't played, and boy did I dodge a bullet.
Response to some of the comments:
On the topic of baby Pokemon, one advantage is that they allow that line to specifically appear in an earlier area of another game without breaking game balance, like how Munchlax can appear early in the Alola game; in addition to what's said about encouraging breeding.
A lot of people complain about how tedious the older between the back tracking and how a lot of tedious systems plagued the older titles, but I feel like in Gens 1-4, this was largley influenced by the game design of other JRPGs, specifically Dragon Quest, which was the inspiration for the trading system in Pokemon.
I've been playing through Dragon Quest 8: Journey of the Cursed King on the 3DS, and there is a lot of backtracking and detours to do while progressing the story. A particularly notable example is when you arrive at the Dark Ruins hot in pursuit of the anatagonist, Dhoulmagus, who just recently killed another victim. Upon arriving at the ruins, there's a magic aura preventing entrance. So you have to go to another kingdom and do an unrelated quest to get a magic mirror that dispel the aura, effectively killing the mood. And then once you get the mirror, you are told it lacks magic so you have to visit another location to learn how to recharge the mirror and then travel to that location, which isn't specifically said, and then recharge by " using " a non-weapon item in combat. After all that, finally you can explore the Dark Ruins and defeat Dhoulmagus.
Doesn't that sound familiar to like how people complain about the progression of Sinnoh and Johto? This kind of system in which the player has to travel a lot and do a bunch of unrelated sidequests in order to make progression encourages the player to take their time and explore the world in multiple sessions as opposed to doing in one session- doing that grants the player additional perks like getting better gear, more lore, or items to help create better gear.
On the topic of baby Pokemon, one advantage is that they allow that line to specifically appear in an earlier area of another game without breaking game balance, like how Munchlax can appear early in the Alola game; in addition to what's said about encouraging breeding.
A lot of people complain about how tedious the older between the back tracking and how a lot of tedious systems plagued the older titles, but I feel like in Gens 1-4, this was largley influenced by the game design of other JRPGs, specifically Dragon Quest, which was the inspiration for the trading system in Pokemon.
I've been playing through Dragon Quest 8: Journey of the Cursed King on the 3DS, and there is a lot of backtracking and detours to do while progressing the story. A particularly notable example is when you arrive at the Dark Ruins hot in pursuit of the anatagonist, Dhoulmagus, who just recently killed another victim. Upon arriving at the ruins, there's a magic aura preventing entrance. So you have to go to another kingdom and do an unrelated quest to get a magic mirror that dispel the aura, effectively killing the mood. And then once you get the mirror, you are told it lacks magic so you have to visit another location to learn how to recharge the mirror and then travel to that location, which isn't specifically said, and then recharge by " using " a non-weapon item in combat. After all that, finally you can explore the Dark Ruins and defeat Dhoulmagus.
Doesn't that sound familiar to like how people complain about the progression of Sinnoh and Johto? This kind of system in which the player has to travel a lot and do a bunch of unrelated sidequests in order to make progression encourages the player to take their time and explore the world in multiple sessions as opposed to doing in one session- doing that grants the player additional perks like getting better gear, more lore, or items to help create better gear.
Because they had guides.
God.
I hate. This. Argument. Used all the fucking time for retro gaming. IT'S BECAUSE MFERS WERE PAYING A SHIT TON OF MONEY TO PHONE LINES!
This was the PEAK of the gaming guides! Buy this magazine, subscribe to Nintendo Power, call our phone line to get tips and tricks! That is how kids got through games like Zelda and Pokemon, because
1. They had a shit ton of time on their hands, and despite the recent increase to $70 games literally effectively cost more back then, meaning people played the games for longer, which was a deliberate part of the design to make people play games for longer
2. Because there was entire predatory industry around making shitty designed games with no direction, and having kids pay to understand the basics/learn where to go lmao
Kids were not smarter in the 90s, they had less choice for what to play and they asked their parents to buy a magazine, or their friend used a magazine. Also, while rarer, the fucking internet existed! People also looked up guides back then!
Were there maybe some kids that did it without external help? Sure, probably. But the reason the majority were able to get through it was because guides are not new to the industry, it was at its peak in the 90s with phone lines, magazines, game guides, and the internet still existed.
Last edited:
A lot of us played that game with no internet, guides, and in some cases like mine, we couldn't even speak English.
It's hardly believable that people got filtered by Kanto's fake open world.
The Safari Zone is kind of a mess tho.
Yeah also, ftr, my post is only in terms of the group that actually beat the game
Tons of people didn't have the money for guides, tip lines, or the internet, etc. etc. etc.
And a lot of people just didn't beat the game
This is honestly a sobering point: There are many games even now people never even any%, much less 100%
RPGs are extremely guilty of this, for as you said, due to predatory practice of guides
Pokemon seems to have wanted to steer away from it since Gen 2, having guides more for extraneous optional mons and items than legit barriers. For as memed as the Braille puzzle is in Gen 3, it's not needed to beat the game
Of course version exclusives are shitty practices themselves till this day, but that again only matters for optional mons
That said, Kanto's bigger issue is how boring it is for landscape diversity compared to later. None of the remakes really fix this (Sevii is postgame). Gen 2 is similarly guilty, though aesthetic of rural areas helps, same for HGSS's autumn theme. Kanto's urbanism is too lightly done nor unique enough across towns
Gameplay wise it's still passable, and arguably better for team building and level curve than Johto. But it's blah to look at
RPGs are extremely guilty of this, for as you said, due to predatory practice of guides
Pokemon seems to have wanted to steer away from it since Gen 2, having guides more for extraneous optional mons and items than legit barriers. For as memed as the Braille puzzle is in Gen 3, it's not needed to beat the game
That said, Kanto's bigger issue is how boring it is for landscape diversity compared to later. None of the remakes really fix this (Sevii is postgame). Gen 2 is similarly guilty, though aesthetic of rural areas helps, same for HGSS's autumn theme. Kanto's urbanism is too lightly done nor unique enough across towns
Gameplay wise it's still passable, and arguably better for team building and level curve than Johto. But it's blah to look at
And that's a massive reason why FRLG sucks.
I don't fault Kanto for being this bland, it was designed for the Game Boy, not even the GBC.
It did not age well though. It was showing it's age badly by Gen 3, now, it looks even worse.
I think your argument is off by about 10 years.
The Legend of Zelda on the NES hailed from an era where you weren't even remotely expected to beat the majority of the video games that you owned. Pokemon Red & Blue absolutely did not belong to that same era.
I also think it's too reductive to reduce this aspect of 20th century game design to a negative "guide-dependent" argument in the first place. One thing that's kind of been lost to time is how single player games used to also be social experiences. Like, real-life, analog social experiences. If you got stuck in part of a game, one of the first things you'd do is talk with a friend and ask what they did to get past it. This is more or less the real definition of a "metagame"--the game outside the game. Collaborating on an adventure could actually add something of value to the experience, make it feel more immersive. It was fun to share secrets and strategies that you found with others. There was a case to be made that the need for the player to create maps for something like Metroid or Phantasy Star in order to keep from getting lost wasn't "busywork," but a substantive consequence to make the experience more meaningful, and sharing those notes with friends was enjoyable, made it feel like you were accomplishing something bigger through the act of working together. It was a huge part of the appeal of games like Myst, which were incredibly cryptic and sparse on purpose, and which using a guide for would completely kill the appeal of the entire game. When modern Dark Souls fans talk about the value of collaboration and community strategizing to beat difficult bosses, it's sort of cut from the same cloth of what I'm taking about. (And as an aside, it's also part of the reason why I often find Souls fans to be insufferable. They tend to have no perspective of video game history and will gush nonstop about how "revolutionary" some component of it is when it's just derivative of something that's been around for 3 or 4 decades. You can draw a very clear through-line from Tower of Druaga to From Soft's catalog. But that's all beside the point.)
Anyway, I dunno how best to articulate that Pokemon Red & Blue really wasn't all that difficult to figure out when it was new, especially compared to the older stuff I just mentioned in the previous paragraph. It has very little resource management compared to so many of its predecessors, no equipment/weapon/armor component, and battles that are strictly 1v1 at all times instead of involving an entire party's worth of actions for each turn with all of the tactical team/attack synergy that such systems could offer. It is nearly maximally a "baby's first RPG" as an RPG of its time could be. Part of the whole reason why it was one of the first Japanese RPGs to catch fire in the mainstream American gaming populace was because it was more approachable than most! The link-cable trading/battling component of the game also made it much, much more relevant to the communal nature of video games than anything else I outlined above. Pokemon has been a "press the A button to win" game since its inception; some players just had to grind more to get it done because of their inexperience with RPGs at the time. I was there. Not only did I not need a guide for it, but I could almost beat the game on a single session, and the only reason why I couldn't at first was because my first exposure to the game was from borrowing a friend's cartridge and being absolutely forbidden from saving over his progress, so I basically just approached it with a speedrunner's mindset to squeeze out what I could before either the batteries died or I had to quit and do something else.
It's why I usually find it a little funny whenever somebody bemoans how "dumbed down" the franchise has gotten over time. Yeah, sometimes there's some truth to that and sometimes I also have gripes with specific changes, but, like, part of the reason why you feel that way is because you also just didn't have a very good frame of reference when you were 7 years old or whatever.
Kanto is not obtuse by 1990s RPG standards.
Last edited:
You weren’t? Thats..kinda sad
not gonna reply to everything individually (can you even do that in the same post?) but to add to some of the stuff from the recent pages:
Mt. Coronet is both great and frustrating at the same time. Great because it's a really neat blueprint for a more expansive landscape design that makes exploring fun, rewarding and challening, bad because it's the best example of how stupid Gen 4s HM overabundance was. (it also really bugs me how long they tried to mantain something that was inspired by Dragon Quest 1. And only 1. Because it was annoying there too)
As for the discussion about pathfinding and old games taking longer to complete...I got stuck on Vermilllion City as a kid because I was too stupid to realize you had to go East from Cerulean. Which is (despite my dislike for the region) very much not Kantos fault and related to me being an idiot back then.
I think the perception on this is just warped since as kids and teenagers you have far more time, so being stuck on a certain part of a game for days if not weeks was not an issue. I remember never getting past 50 Stars in Mario 64 before I turned 10, yet at 13 I 100%ed it because I became more involved with gaming in general. (also experience making me better at playing) You have more time, less games, and in a lot of cases (Pokemon especially) a friendship network where you exchange on how to progress at certain parts.
Nowadays I get frustrated when I'm stuck for more than half an hour (Edit note: very much not true for Pokemon), and often catch myself looking up little stuff, especially in older RPGs (also missables) because the time I can spent has simply been cut down by having to work and do annoying "adult" stuff. (being more experienced also means I never really get completely stuck so I guess it balances itself out a bit at least...) NES era games tend to be a lot more unforgiving in terms of obscure design (the first 2 Zeldas are generally seen as guide games), but I do think it persisted in lesser form in some way (though mostly optional, as being mentioned by others above)
As for Kanto/FRLG... I would not say FRLG sucks, but it definitely feels to safe. Kanto as a whole is just bland, and while not as egregious as Johto the path splits still create a few problems (which in turn should tell us that, with the way levels in Pokemon work, non-linearity is not working too well if you don't make sure you design around it). The path from Lavender to Fuchsia is super easy with lots of low levels, the water routes are generally weak too, Silph Co. is a joke, yet the cycling road and both Sabrina and Koga have much higher levels if you don't do the other parts first (they are still not hard due to bad mon selection (and in RBYs case bad AI) but it can be an issue.)
I hope I didn't miss any typos, this post is longer than usual
Mt. Coronet is both great and frustrating at the same time. Great because it's a really neat blueprint for a more expansive landscape design that makes exploring fun, rewarding and challening, bad because it's the best example of how stupid Gen 4s HM overabundance was. (it also really bugs me how long they tried to mantain something that was inspired by Dragon Quest 1. And only 1. Because it was annoying there too)
As for the discussion about pathfinding and old games taking longer to complete...I got stuck on Vermilllion City as a kid because I was too stupid to realize you had to go East from Cerulean. Which is (despite my dislike for the region) very much not Kantos fault and related to me being an idiot back then.
I think the perception on this is just warped since as kids and teenagers you have far more time, so being stuck on a certain part of a game for days if not weeks was not an issue. I remember never getting past 50 Stars in Mario 64 before I turned 10, yet at 13 I 100%ed it because I became more involved with gaming in general. (also experience making me better at playing) You have more time, less games, and in a lot of cases (Pokemon especially) a friendship network where you exchange on how to progress at certain parts.
Nowadays I get frustrated when I'm stuck for more than half an hour (Edit note: very much not true for Pokemon), and often catch myself looking up little stuff, especially in older RPGs (also missables) because the time I can spent has simply been cut down by having to work and do annoying "adult" stuff. (being more experienced also means I never really get completely stuck so I guess it balances itself out a bit at least...) NES era games tend to be a lot more unforgiving in terms of obscure design (the first 2 Zeldas are generally seen as guide games), but I do think it persisted in lesser form in some way (though mostly optional, as being mentioned by others above)
As for Kanto/FRLG... I would not say FRLG sucks, but it definitely feels to safe. Kanto as a whole is just bland, and while not as egregious as Johto the path splits still create a few problems (which in turn should tell us that, with the way levels in Pokemon work, non-linearity is not working too well if you don't make sure you design around it). The path from Lavender to Fuchsia is super easy with lots of low levels, the water routes are generally weak too, Silph Co. is a joke, yet the cycling road and both Sabrina and Koga have much higher levels if you don't do the other parts first (they are still not hard due to bad mon selection (and in RBYs case bad AI) but it can be an issue.)
Last edited:
Yes, you can.
To me, what instantly turns me off a game is when it's one of those massive, 40+ hour games, especially when it has a lot of grinding.
I already work too much to have a hobby that requires tedious padding.
People be talking a lot about Mt Coronet and literally all I see it as is a boring multi-floor square Mt Moon that requires HMs.
I really dgaf about it, it's boring aesthetically in-game and its lore is just okay
Having the player go through the same areas to cross the region is cool ig but it takes like 30 seconds lol I barely even register it in my head
I really dgaf about it, it's boring aesthetically in-game and its lore is just okay
Having the player go through the same areas to cross the region is cool ig but it takes like 30 seconds lol I barely even register it in my head
I had more problems beating Sapphire that I ever had with either LeafGreen or Red's Kanto -because of the submarine of all things. It's definetly not obtuse when as mentioned you are a kid with tons of free time and a single game for most of the year. If 5 year old me could figure it out despite not learning the type table propertly (Poison being used so much with Grass made me think Psychic was effective against Grass for example) I can't see an argument for any guides needed for it in all honestly. You would just figure it out by trial and error. I find Paldea a lot more confusing for example, if only because of the weird movements you are supposed to do following the level curve, but that's probably an old topic by now.
Coronet is neat as a concept but I have to agree on ot not really being memorable for me. It just wasn't that impressive.
Coronet is neat as a concept but I have to agree on ot not really being memorable for me. It just wasn't that impressive.
Mt. Coronet's interior could've used a bit more visual pizzazz, but it is what it is. If anything, it made the transition into the snow section even more memorable, but that's mostly because that music hits different.
If it weren't for the HM problem, people wouldn't be as mad. It's a great set-piece that does a great job. If anything, it feels like what all Victory Roads try to achieve (and fail).
Yeah, I'mma call all of them out. Victory Roads were never really that good.
If it weren't for the HM problem, people wouldn't be as mad. It's a great set-piece that does a great job. If anything, it feels like what all Victory Roads try to achieve (and fail).
Yeah, I'mma call all of them out. Victory Roads were never really that good.
Mount Coronet feels just like what all Victory Roads try to acheive (and fail), and Mount Coronet also fails.
Yeah, I'm not going to sugarcoat it, Mount Coronet is mid as it doesn't really have much to do in there, it's just a boring ass mountain. There isn't anything interesting that happens. Iron Island is much more enjoyable and feels like if that was Mount Coronet, then it would have been up to all the hype people talk about it. The reason why Mount Coronet being just a mountain is bad is because it is the centrepiece of the region, it's meant to be interesting.
Victory Roads in general suck and I'm glad that they were done away, it's a cool idea to be a final hurdle to overcome, but it usually boils down to "another cave that is a tiny bit trickier to navigate." The only good Victory Road was the one in B2W2, which had an interesting layout and going in and out of the cave to traverse, which was much more interesting. Even Hoenn Victory Road (the one that I grew up with) I didn't find interesting and could not tell you the layout of for the life of me. Kanto Victory Road I only remember because it is so iconic.
If you want a cool mountain area, Mount Lanikila from SM or USUM is a good enough mountain, because it has the snow theme and has you go in and out of the cave. I'm not saying that you have to go inside and outside of a cave to make it interesting, just that there needs to be something else than "just another cave".
The interesting thing isn't the look or a specific puzzle, the interesting thing is that every time you come back to it, your abilities mean the layout is different and there's more to explore. It goes from a tiny tunnel with a couple of minor off-shoots to a massive cave system that connects the whole region, and does so with the only thing changing being your abilities. It's the player's growth represented in a clear, obvious manner by bringing you back to it repeatedly.
That's fair, and something I didn't consider. I still don't like Mount Coronet, since I think it kinda just doesn't have enough 'pizzazz', if you get what I mean. The changing layout is interesting, but most pokemon caves have multiple levels which I basically consider similar enough. If Gen 4 didn't have as many HMs as they did, it could be an interesting area, but I like to evaluate areas based on their appearences (BDSP is trash, so it doesn't count), and Mount Coronet really hurts from the use of HM's being so constricting to player expression. If there were ride pokemon, then it could be a lot better.
Similar threads
- Locked
