Unpopular opinions

Being positive instead of negative and spreading love instead of hate is a better thing to do.
WOW WHO COULDVE GUESSED
(also much of the "hate" is good as criticism and directing anger towards someting at all. its such a general term and so easy to fit, like how you use it)
Third and last, I think this is unpopular because I don’t think anyone will agree with me here. I think that Gen 4 and 7 are similar or almost the same when it comes to the structure of the games that were featured in those generations.
the difference is (i think) that Plat just better, while USM either had flaws the originals didn't have, or maintained them. namely the story and tutorials. Also usm being part of 'new' pokemon while plat being old and being in 2 versions instead of one, and how close they are to the present.
(i actually dont know much about sm vs usm)
 

Plague von Karma

Gyda'n gilydd, nawr!
is a Pokemon Researcher
Hey, didn't expect a big response, but I'm happy to see someone invested enough for something in-depth like this!
I’m not sure if this is going to be an exact answer, but I wanted to add some of my own thoughts and opinions here.

First of all, regarding the clash of older and newer fans. I have been a fan of Pokémon since gen 1 but I prefer the newer generations. My favorite is Gen 5, but I am also a fan of Gen 6, 7, 4, 8 and 3, I like them all after Gen 5 in that order. My least favorite is Gen 2 while Gen 1 is my second least favorite. I guess I’m an older fan who likes the newer generations better.

I got burnt out on Pokémon during the latter half of gen 4, then I got back into it in 2011 thanks to B/W. They are special to me because they are the games that got me back into Pokémon and restored my interest in the series to higher levels than it had ever been before. My interest has since then fallen again (mostly starting with OR/AS, it has then continued from there) and only a miracle can restore it again at this point. But that’s for a different discussion. Anyway, when I got back into Pokémon in 2011, B/W and gen 5 received a lot of hate. I have seen some people make comparisons to how much hate S/S received after the reveal of dexit, and while I don’t remember it being that bad myself, I think it was still pretty bad. A lot of the hate was just nostalgia-blind hatred for the new Pokémon, something that seems to happen to every new generation after gen 2. I guess that’s not very surprising though. I remembered that it had happened before with gen 3 and especially gen 4 where it seemed like everybody hated the Sinnoh Pokémon, especially many of the new generations to older Pokémon. In comparison, gen 1 and 2 got next to zero hate or criticism for anything, they basically got a free pass for everything.

Because I liked Gen 5, seeing it get so much hate from other fans and the fandom on the whole made me angry, and in return, I had to let out my anger on something I didn’t like. Which happened to be Gen 1 and 2 as they are my least favorites. I couldn’t hate gen 3 and 4 since I liked them (except HG/SS which are utter garbage and the worst games in the series) so I directed my anger towards Gen 1 and 2 instead. Which one I disliked the most varied from time to time. I think it was Gen 2 at first (mostly because of HG/SS but also because of G/S/C), then Gen 1 because of annoying former Pokémon fans hating the newer generations, then Gen 2 again due to its massive gameplay issues. Currently, Gen 2 is my least favorite, but with that I mean both G/S/C and HG/SS. I am mostly critical towards HG/SS nowadays but I can criticize other generations too for issues they have, not only gen 1 and 2 but also gen 3-8 as well. In general, I find it easier to write lengthy posts about things I dislike in games rather than things I like. I would probably have an easier time making a post where I thrash HG/SS thoroughly than a post where I praise B/W and B2/W2. That’s a bit weird, but that’s how I feel.

Now that I look back at the above, I guess it is a bit stupid. I shouldn’t have been so negative towards Gen 1 and 2 because others were negative towards the newer generations, I should have tried to be more positive instead. Being positive instead of negative and spreading love instead of hate is a better thing to do. But I guess it was hard to do because of how the Pokémon fandom works, always whining and complaining about everything. I guess this post just contributes to that even more. I should start working on my next post in the likes thread instead to compensate and in order to spread more positivity. That said, I try to be positive when I can. During the Gen 5 days, I wasn't afraid to say positive things about Gen 5, or Gen 3 and D/P/P. Nowadays, I try to be positive to the games I like, but it isn't always easy. I can also give some praise to the few things I actually do like about gen 1/2 and HGSS.
I can agree here! Back around those days, Gen 1-2 were a lot more well-liked, and elitism was very common as a result. It was usually the art style shifts that caused this, though some players also disliked the physical-special split due to metagame shifts resulting from it. It was a very weird time, and I used to be one of those elitists as a matter of fact. I changed my tune very quickly though, roughly around...2014ish, I think? It was mainly how much I enjoyed XY that made me go back to BW and be like "hey this ain't actually bad".

It also seems like the hate for Gen 5 never ends. In the past, it was hated because it was new and different. Now, it has been getting more loved and appreciated as of late, and that seems to have made the haters more vocal again. Feels like you can never see anything positive being said about Gen 5 without also seeing something negative to go along with it. That makes me sad to see, but I have also more or less gotten used to it at this point, which is also said.
From my experience, Gen 5 seems to be on an upturn in terms of who likes it. Maybe it's just the friend circles I've found myself in, but especially with that Poke Classic Network thing from 2018, people have been flocking back and enjoying it much more. I believe the competitive scene also has a lot of devout players. Not saying this to deny your experience, because it's clearly happened and is very unfortunate, but I encourage you to look around! In these cases, I recommend trying to find dedicated communities for the games!

Every generation after gen 2 seems to get a lot of nostalgia-blind hatred from former Pokémon fans, mostly directed towards the new Pokémon, but sometimes also for things related to gameplay and mechanics. I find the latter to be a more valid reason for disliking a new generation, even if I still disagree with it a lot of the time (but it depends on exactly what and which generation it is about).

This was notable in the past, and it still is nowadays. If you go to social medias or general gaming sites and look for a discussion about Pokémon, it will very likely feature former Pokémon fans who hate the newer generations. I’m not sure if it was worse in the past but it still exists nowadays at least. One recent situation I remember was when I saw someone make a discussion thread for Sword/Shield on a general gaming site I used to go to. The very first reply in that thread was from a former Pokémon fan who spewed nostalgia-blind hatred for all new Pokémon. I found it really annoying to see that happening, and that’s one of the many reasons as for why I left that site. I am very happy to see that something like this almost never happens on actual Pokémon sites like here on Smogon, there are very few former Pokémon fans here, there are way more current Pokémon fans instead. I think that is great and that is one reason I stick with these forums.
As an old fan, I draw a lot of parallels between "the nostalgia-fueled hatred of newer games" with the newer players having extreme distaste for the old games. There's very little difference between them, both are extremely toxic and tend to just drive the community division further. I often hear the same recycled ideas about why the old games are the devilspawn of man and are "objectively bad" messes that should have never been made. The idea of something being "objectively" bad is already a preposterous idea considering human individuality, but anyway, not the thread for that. Personally, I'm of the opinion that if someone enjoys it, there's no need to ambush them on their way home and drag them to bad opinion jail.

So I guess that's one possible reason. But there's more. Personally, I find gen 1 to be obsolete and outdated. I tried to replay Red one last time in 2006 and I couldn’t finish the main game, I found it outdated already back then. I had much more fun playing Emerald which was a more modern and better game. I did replay LeafGreen the next year though, and I had much more fun with it, I could finish the main game with ease. Overall, I find R/B/Y to be obsolete because of FR/LG.
The idea of RBY being obsolete doesn't make that much sense to me. The games have some of the most connectivity of any Pokemon game in the series, only rivalled by the Game Boy Advance titles. Pokemon Stadium, for example, gives you incredible reward for playing around with the Game Boy titles, and a lot more bang for your buck. While the Game Boy Advance games have connectivity with the GameCube, it can hardly be compared in terms of how much mileage you get for it. And this is just one of the games you can connect with; there's inter-generation connectivity with GSC and Stad2. Not to mention the completely different battle mechanics providing some of the most unique experiences of any Pokemon generation.

I also feel that gen 1 gets so much attention for various things that I don’t think it deserves, which the other generations rarely gets. Some examples are the story and the characters, the Pokémon designs, the graphics and sprites, the music, the Kanto region, Yellow being a good third version or “the only true” third version, and maybe more things. Some examples I have seen here on the forums are posts where people praise an individual Pokémon or character, and it is usually from Gen 1, it rarely happens for any other generation. Now there's nothing wrong with liking or praising things from Gen 1, but I find it annoying because it seems to happen so much for gen 1 and so little for every other generation. I also happen to disagree or not care much for those things that gen 1 gets praise for.
It's hard to understand just how much ground Pokemon broke in the 90s, especially for fans who weren't heavily into it back then. At the time, the internet was in its infancy, and there were very few games of a scale akin to what Pokemon had. You can look around, the only comparable titles would be The Legend of Zelda on the NES or something like that. This resulted in the game blowing up in popularity in a way only really replicated by Minecraft. It spawned merchandise in almost every way you could possibly imagine, and the events...oh man, the events. The competitive scene was even televised in Japan, as I said in my OP. The level of influence Pokemon had during the 90s cannot be overstated. The way it bounced back after the Pokemon Shock event of 1997 is also something to behold. Of course, this is an abbreviated history, and I don't think it'd satisfy you at all, but I thought I'd give some input. Did the games age well? Probably not, but compared to other Game Boy games, it's definitely stood the test of time. I'd argue many are borderline unplayable. Super Mario Land 2 could probably fit on a GBA though, man that game looks pretty.

I mean, if you want characters from other gens to get more attention, well, you can always do it yourself. If you find it annoying, I believe that to be a personal problem. Liking something is very subjective, and what someone likes isn't to your taste, that's ok! There's nothing wrong with that, and nobody should fault you for it.

I have never understood why people like the story and the characters from gen 1 so much, I find them to be rather bland an uninteresting on the whole. I find them to be too uninteresting and badly executed on the whole. Especially Blue who I find extremely overrated. I think he is a terrible rival, he is just a jerk with uninteresting characteristics and minimal character development. He is my least favorite rival in the series and the only one who didn’t really get improved in FR/LG, sadly. Overall, if we just go by the gen 1 games and ignore remakes and other media like anime/manga, the story and characters are incredibly flat and boring. The only interesting character IMO is Giovanni, and even so he isn't that great. Things do get better if we include other media such as the anime or notably Pokémon adventures, as well as the remakes. But still, it is far from the best in the series if you ask me.
I can agree that the baseline story for Kanto is pretty bland. Pokemon has never necessarily been about the story, I believe Gen 4 was when they actually started to try on that note, before Gen 5 came in with that showstopper. FRLG hardly even worked on improving the story either, let alone Blue. It's the weakest part of Gen 1 as a whole. You can link it to how games were made at the time, storytelling wasn't really a central focus back then. I wish FRLG modernized it, really. This is partly why I say RBY isn't ageing the greatest.

I also think gen 1 has the worst Pokémon designs on the whole. Yes, there are many good ones but also many that are bland and forgettable which I don’t care much for. If I were in charge of dexit and which Pokemon would not appear in a game, gen 1 would be the first one I’d go to and definitely the one I’d remove the most Pokémon from. It also seems like the Pokémon from gen 1 are immune to all forms of criticism, you never see them get anything close to the extreme hate that the ones from the newer generations gets, and it seems like everyone is okay with the new Pokémon being hated on. And no matter which Kanto game you play, you are only going to see Kanto Pokémon during the main game. I am personally rather tired of the Gen 1 Pokémon for several reasons: I have been a Pokémon fan for so long and they have existed for the longest so I am just tired of seeing them, they have the worst designs on the whole, and I am tired of all the attention they get (more about that further below).
I personally like most of the designs, but that's my familiarity speaking. Rhydon, Dodrio, Venusaur, Chansey and Vaporeon are my personal favourites!

I highly doubt Gen 1 Pokemon are "immune to criticism". Whenever a "Pokemon has bad designs these days" argument spouts up, the first thing I see people go to is Gen 1 designs. Exeggcute, Diglett -> Dugtrio, Magneton, etc are consistently bought up there and torn to shreds. I rarely, if ever, see any other Pokemon designs bought up in those debates.

The bit about only seeing Kanto in Kanto games is kind of what you'd expect in the games, really. RSE, DP and BW all did the same thing, and it's just a series formula. In BW specifically, they made it extremely hard to find any old Pokemon, which is where a lot of the animosity towards it came from on the initial release.

I think the sprites are not that good on the whole, they look especially bad compared to the ones in gen 2 which were on the same system while were much better on the whole. I don’t think they are anything special from a stylished or surreal artstyle either. As for the music, I guess it is fine, Gen 1 has many good soundtracks. But why should it be the only one that gets praise for the music when there are many other good examples in other generations as well? Regarding the Kanto region, I don’t think it is as great as people give it credit for. Yes it is a bit more open than most other regions apart from Johto, but it doesn’t feel like this openness accomplishes anything. It would benefit from being more linear and less open if you ask me. I prefer linear Pokémon regions. And Game Freak has shown that they have absolutely no idea how to make a more open game and do it right.
I personally like Yellow's sprites, though RG and RB's designs were definitely not the finest. For what Game Freak was at the time though, I give em props. In the grand scheme of things though, you can see why they never imported RG's sprites.

Gen 1 definitely does not get the only praise for soundtrack, just take a scroll down here!

The open nature is more wasted potential than something unnecessary imo. Pokemon Crystal Clear, a ROM Hack, shows exactly what could be done to RBY. I think there is a hack that opens up the region more and adds level scaling, but I can't remember the name if it does exist. I don't think modern Game Freak not knowing how to make an open region is a relevant point though, given this is a game from 1996...

Regarding Yellow, I have never liked it as much as R/B, it is my second least favorite Pokémon game on the whole. It didn’t do as many improvements over the first pairs as Crystal, Emerald, Platinum or US/UM did. In fact, I find it to be worse than R/B. The whole concept of fusing the games with the anime never worked for me, and I wasn’t super fond of being forced to start with a Pikachu I can’t even evolve.
I personally dislike Yellow's early game, since you're forced to either catch a Mankey or level up a Nidoran to L12 for Double Kick if you want a shot at Brock.

Regarding the "third version" bit, this is a common misconception. In Japan, Yellow was released alongside an "official" release of Japanese Blue, after the latter was put on a special mail order in Corocoro 2 years prior. You could take them as sequel games in this case, though it's mostly semantics and puts em more with BW2 and USUM.

Even then, though...I'm not sure what you're really expecting from Yellow. It improves the sprites, fixes many of the bugs (Old Man Glitch, for example), and makes many learnset improvements. It even added moves to multiple Pokemon, such as Kinesis Kadabra and Low Kick Mankey. For the first shot at a new version, they did a damn good job. I personally find Yellow to be among the best Game Boy titles out there, it's graphically stellar and gameplay-wise it's definitely among the best RPGs of the system.

There’s also the glitches and buggy mechanics which R/B/Y and gen 1 are (in)famous for. I have never cared much for them either, I have always found them overrated and not worthy of any hype. Playing a game because of the glitches feels like a bad reason to me, and I’m happy that the general mechanics was improved in the future generations.
This feels a bit like gatekeeping; you don't need a reason to play a game, let alone a "good" one. That's all I'll say here.

I also think I might be too mild and forgiving towards Gen 1 myself at times. It is easy to give it a free pass for various things just because it was the first. But I’m not sure if that is the right thing to do. Just because it was the first and it started the series does not make it immune to criticism.
And I agree, no game is immune to criticism, and lord knows I wish the x/256 accuracy issue didn't exist.

I guess those are my personal reasons as for why I don’t care or like Gen 1 that much. If we look on a broader perspective, as for why it is “overhated” in general, I think one big reason is that gen 1 receives so much attention and focus everywhere. Or simply fan pandering, if we are to be radically honest. Starting from Gen 6, the main series has been giving more and more attention to Gen 1. The only real exception being OR/AS which focused on Hoenn instead, which was a nice change of pace. But in X/Y, S/M, US/UM and even S/S to an extent, there was a lot of focus and references to Gen 1. The Isle of Armor continued this by bringing back a lot of old gen 1 Pokemon which had been dexited, more than what was brought back from any other generation. And of course there’s LGP/E which are the biggest of them all, giving full attention to gen 1 and nothing else (no, Meltan and Melmetal doesn’t count). Personally, I think Gen 7 was the worst here on the whole, Gen 6 was fine and Gen 8 mostly tolerable.
Gen 1 gets the most attention, to absolutely no one's surprise or shock, because it's the easiest way to advertise. Familiarity is very important in the advertising field, as it ensures the brand remains commonplace and "too big to fail". It's like how Disney has always been Mickey Mouse, and not the new characters, see? Who would be receptive to Sudowoodo and Aurorus on a poster advertising Pokemon? Likely only fans who exist already. Once we leave Game Freak's advertising department, I see more love for literally anything else, and I think that's a good thing. Look at when Wooloo was revealed and the internet exploded, that's great! But, I don't see why Game Freak's advertising should justify it? It's nothing to do with the games, after all.

I think LGPE was important since Kanto wasn't on the DS-3DS family prior. As of ORAS, it was the only region not playable on that family of systems, until the Virtual Console versions came out. It was a pretty big nightmare to get hold of Kanto until that happened. I think it's a bit of a goalpost-moving thing to say Meltan and Melmetal don't count since they were there to advertise GO, which isn't Kanto at all. Hell, LGPE's entire concept was bringing Pokemon GO into a "mainline" setting. It's definitely a Kanto game, but to say it's specifically only about Yellow is a misunderstanding at best.

A minor correction on the note of Gen 6 beginning the "Kanto fever"; Gen 1 has always been the thing getting attention. It's a staple of the brand, here's some examples generation-wise;
  • Gen 2 was designed as a sequel to Gen 1, and it's partly why there's a lot of Kanto in the early-game.
  • Gen 3 had FRLG
  • Gen 4 Evolved many Kanto Pokemon
  • Gen 5 used Gen 1 Pokemon as a focal point of their designs, there are interviews about this. Take Bouffalant to Tauros, for example. I personally think it was an amazing idea, and the execution was super cool.
    • A few interviews; here and here. There's more, but I don't have them on me.
This also happens in side-games and other stuff. Like Pokemon Origins, Pokemon Go (when it was first released), minor side-animations and songs as well as merchandise. It is either gen 1 or sometimes the current gen, the focus is rarely given to any of the other old generations. There’s also unrelated media which gives attention to gen 1. Twitch Plays Pokemon, for instance. It had a huge focus on Gen 1, and then nobody cared anymore once they had beaten Red and moved on to the next game. And this never seems to end either, Gen 1 continues to get most of the focus throughout all generations, making many fans, me included, tired of seeing it get so much attention that the other generations doesn’t get. There’s also the anime which I don’t watch but from what I have understood, it has given a bit of attention to Gen 1 in the later seasons too with the original theme song getting a remix in X/Y, and Brock and Misty coming back in S/M. The newer movies seem to have been more aiming for a “reboot” as well, but it doesn’t seem like they focus that much on gen 1 to me (I haven’t seen them, so I can’t really say).
Pokemon Origins, I mean, ok? Chronicles existed too, it's not a new thing to go back to old stuff during a generation. It happened to be Kanto at the time, and personally I'd love to see the concept re-imagined for Gens 2-3. As for merchandise, that goes way beyond Kanto and you absolutely know that. Take, for example, the plushes, they have them for every region.

The Pokemon anime dedicates almost everything to the current generation at hand, I really don't know what you're on about here. They had Iris and Dawn get featured a ton in later seasons, and that's the least of it. Brock and Misty had been anime staples until what, Gen 6? I don't see why them coming back would even be related to the whole "pandering", it's basic familiarity and a return to the normal material. This feels like a massive reach. Are you sure you're not just looking for something to hate at that point?

As for the competitive scene… I’m not a competitive player myself so I can’t really speak about it, but from what I have seen, gen 1 seems to be a lot more luck-based compared to the newer generations. Someone once described it as a glorified haxfest which sounds very reasonable to me. It feels like it goes against one of the main aspects of competitive battling as battles are determined mostly by luck rather than skill. And Ubers only seem to be about whoever plays their Mewtwo better. But I could be wrong here because as said, I have no actual experience with the Gen 1 metagame.
As someone who plays competitive RBY and got badged solely for my contributions to the sim, I will say you're definitely very wrong. Compared to newer generations, I would say this is a myth. The worst part of the RNG is a 10% chance to freeze which is death, but outside of this, I would argue it's among the more skill-based games. I mean, you could throw the x/256 uncertainty in, but that's a universal accuracy decrease of .2-.4%, which is hardly anything. There's a ton of interesting mechanics outside of this, such as the type-based secondary effect immunity I talked about in my post. It adds tons of dimensions to strategy that I find extremely enjoyable. You can ask any competitive RBY player and they will all tell you that the "RBY is luck-based" trope is an extremely false claim to make. Shellnuts in the RoA room on PS smashes the argument day-in-day-out. If you wanted to criticise the meta, you could easily bring up The Big 4, Reflect, or WrapSwitching, but even then, a lot of the time people would tell you to check out UU, which mostly diminishes this.

I’m not sure if that answered your question, but that’s how I feel, so I hope that has given you some food for thought at least. I’m sorry of this comes off as sour and negative, but that’s just how I feel. To summarize, gen 1 might seem "overhated" because of all the undeserved praise it gets and the attention it gets in many different ways. Personally, I think I think gen 1 is overrated rather than overhated, being the first and the original does not make it immune to criticism. And this gave me yet another opportunity to say some things I have wanted to say for a long time (Smogon seems to be good at that), so I want to think you for that.
It feels like you're more disillusioned by the advertising Game Freak does, and I think it's perfectly justified. Though at the same time, it comes off as slight confirmation bias. It's not a bad thing, and I can tell you've been through the wars of the BW era, and I can't fault you for it. I'm happy to debate further if you're up for it, I enjoy long posts like these.
 
Last edited:

Yung Dramps

awesome gaming
A minor correction on the note of Gen 6 beginning the "Kanto fever"; Gen 1 has always been the thing getting attention. It's a staple of the brand, here's some examples generation-wise;
  • Gen 2 was designed as a sequel to Gen 1, and it's partly why there's a lot of Kanto in the early-game.
  • Gen 3 had FRLG
  • Gen 4 Evolved many Kanto Pokemon
  • Gen 5 used Gen 1 Pokemon as a focal point of their designs, there are interviews about this. Take Bouffalant to Tauros, for example. I personally think it was an amazing idea, and the execution was super cool.
    • A few interviews; here and here. There's more, but I don't have them on me.
Literally this. I really don't understand why people are saying all of a sudden Game Freak is pandering too hard to Kanto when it's always been like that. I mean for god's sake, every single Gen from 2 to 4 had a game where you could visit Kanto and even Gen 5 had a dex composed of a whole lot of Kanto homage Pokemon (which contrary to what you think I actually believe was a terrible idea that chipped into the dex quality and identity to a tremendous extent, diminishing the "soft reboot" appeal immensely). I mean for God's sake in-game Driftveil Bridge is nicknamed the Charizard Bridge for... uh... uhhhh...
 

Merritt

literally the textbook definition of a tsundere
is a member of the Site Staffis a Forum Moderatoris a Community Contributoris a Contributor to Smogon
Moderator
A minor correction on the note of Gen 6 beginning the "Kanto fever"; Gen 1 has always been the thing getting attention. It's a staple of the brand, here's some examples generation-wise;
  • Gen 3 had FRLG
  • Gen 4 Evolved many Kanto Pokemon
These two specific points kind of annoy me which I guess is the point of unpopular opinions?

Yes, Gen 3 as a whole had FRLG, but the main release games (Hoenn) had remarkably little "Kanto fever". Calling out the remakes in the same generation isn't what people generally get as annoyed about when they're talking about Kanto overexposure, but when Kanto is shoehorned into a game that it otherwise has no business being in. On that note, you might as well call out Gen 4 for having HGSS, where you can go to Kanto.

The Gen 4 one is significantly more off to me though. Why? Well let's take a look at the distribution of the Gen 4 evolutionary additions. When connected to more than one gen, grouped where evolution directly connects (so Happiny with Gen 1 because it evolves into Chansey not Blissey).

Gen 1: Mime Jr, Happiny (semi Johto due to Blissey), Munchlax, Magnezone, Lickilicky, Rhyperior, Tangrowth, Electivire (semi Johto due to Elekid), Magmortar (semi Johto due to Magby), Leafeon/Glaceon (eeveelutions also in Johto)
Gen 2: Ambipom, Mismagius, Honchkrow, Bonsly, Mantyke, Weavile, Togekiss, Yanmega, Gliscor, Mamoswine, Porygon-Z (semi Kanto due to Porygon)
Gen 3: Roselia line (gained prevo and evo: +2), Chingling, Gallade, Probopass, Dusknoir, Froslass

In total that's eleven Gen 1, eleven Gen 2, and seven Gen 3. Since the vast majority of the evolutions were buffs to previously underpowered evolutionary lines it's not exactly surprising that Gen 3 (as a more recently balanced group of Pokemon) needed less help from these kinds of evolutions and instead had the only split evolutions.

Even so, that's remarkably well distributed. To compare to Gen 8's new "evolutions" (which I personally dislike being called such since they're tied to the Galarian variant instead of the actual base mon), those have a distribution of one Gen 3, one Gen 2, one Gen 5, and three Gen 1. Fully half of them are Gen 1, which is kind of indicative despite the small sample size. This of course isn't even going into the very Kanto biased Galarian formes (moreso post DLC) or the hilariously bad generational distribution of Gigantamax (exactly 2 Gigantamax Pokemon are not Galar or Kanto, 1 if you don't count Melmetal who to date has only appeared in Kanto and Galar in the core games).

Kanto has always been represented, but "Kanto fever" doesn't refer to Kanto getting represented at all but to Kanto getting overrepresented in comparison to other generations.
 

Plague von Karma

Gyda'n gilydd, nawr!
is a Pokemon Researcher
These two specific points kind of annoy me which I guess is the point of unpopular opinions?

Yes, Gen 3 as a whole had FRLG, but the main release games (Hoenn) had remarkably little "Kanto fever". Calling out the remakes in the same generation isn't what people generally get as annoyed about when they're talking about Kanto overexposure, but when Kanto is shoehorned into a game that it otherwise has no business being in. On that note, you might as well call out Gen 4 for having HGSS, where you can go to Kanto.

The Gen 4 one is significantly more off to me though. Why? Well let's take a look at the distribution of the Gen 4 evolutionary additions. When connected to more than one gen, grouped where evolution directly connects (so Happiny with Gen 1 because it evolves into Chansey not Blissey).

Gen 1: Mime Jr, Happiny (semi Johto due to Blissey), Munchlax, Magnezone, Lickilicky, Rhyperior, Tangrowth, Electivire (semi Johto due to Elekid), Magmortar (semi Johto due to Magby), Leafeon/Glaceon (eeveelutions also in Johto)
Gen 2: Ambipom, Mismagius, Honchkrow, Bonsly, Mantyke, Weavile, Togekiss, Yanmega, Gliscor, Mamoswine, Porygon-Z (semi Kanto due to Porygon)
Gen 3: Roselia line (gained prevo and evo: +2), Chingling, Gallade, Probopass, Dusknoir, Froslass

In total that's eleven Gen 1, eleven Gen 2, and seven Gen 3. Since the vast majority of the evolutions were buffs to previously underpowered evolutionary lines it's not exactly surprising that Gen 3 (as a more recently balanced group of Pokemon) needed less help from these kinds of evolutions and instead had the only split evolutions.

Even so, that's remarkably well distributed. To compare to Gen 8's new "evolutions" (which I personally dislike being called such since they're tied to the Galarian variant instead of the actual base mon), those have a distribution of one Gen 3, one Gen 2, one Gen 5, and three Gen 1. Fully half of them are Gen 1, which is kind of indicative despite the small sample size. This of course isn't even going into the very Kanto biased Galarian formes (moreso post DLC) or the hilariously bad generational distribution of Gigantamax (exactly 2 Gigantamax Pokemon are not Galar or Kanto, 1 if you don't count Melmetal who to date has only appeared in Kanto and Galar in the core games).

Kanto has always been represented, but "Kanto fever" doesn't refer to Kanto getting represented at all but to Kanto getting overrepresented in comparison to other generations.
Hey, whoa whoa, I think you took this the wrong way. I was pointing out that every single Pokemon generation features Kanto in some way or another, usually in a big way. My wording was definitely off; my point was that it always gets attention in some form. For Gen 4 specifically, though, you raise a great point!

The Gen 3 one, though, from a historical context, makes sense in my opinion. At the time, it was the first remake, and it took over 5 years until HGSS was made. You could even say that it was intended to be the only remake, but I don't know if there's any interviews on that. Last I checked, the main intention was to make up for the lack of connectivity with Gen 2, like Gen 1-2. Definitely a shaky one, but I do think there's a case!
 

DreamPrince

Formerly Leader Wallace
Issues like people requesting mythicals / impossible Pokemon or offering rare Pokemon that were nicknamed bad words never got fixed. With Home, several of these issues were finally addressed. There still are several problems (like hacked Pokemon having nicknames to shady URLs & trade evolutions not evolving) but its not as bad as before.
According to Bulbapedia, their are a huge amount of people still requesting Legendary Pokemon, since they only banned the cover legendaries and mythicals, and a lot of people are still complaining that people are putting ridiculous trades like Pidoves for Uxies, so that's still a problem,
Showing statistics: The GTS now shows stats of what the most & least traded Pokemon are. This is extremely cool to a data geek like myself & gives new players an idea of what the "Pokemon economy" is like. Right now, Kubfu & Urshifu are extremely valuable, so being able to get your hands on one gives you a lot of flexibility in what you can & can't get.
Interesting, though I imagine only a small slice of people devote themselves to that info. Not saying that its not interesting, but relatively minor overall. Anyway, I'm not saying that the GTS shouldn't exist in Home, it should be a convenience not a requirement. Don't remove it from the games, and don't monetize it.
TRs that used to be Egg or Tutor moves also had their distributions wildly expanded. The fact that so many Pokemon have a ton of coverage makes the idea of a "counter", in the traditional sense, shaky at best. Venusaur, for example, can no longer be safely walled by Steel-types thanks to its new access to Earth Power. This goes hand-in-hand with Dynamaxing, where a Pokemon can double its bulk and fire off Max coverage moves to brute force their way through a would-be counter.
Hmm... Not a 100% sure if I agree with this or not. I do agree that giving wider move pools should come with each generations, there are concerns over whether Pokemon are getting away with too much coverage. Looking at Zacian-C, Dragapult, and Tapu Koko, they are faster attackers held back by somewhat shallow move pools. at least by level up. Zacian-C learns Moonblast as the only Fairy type move through level up, but with the introduction of TRs, it has access to both STAB moves in the Physical spectrum. Same applies to Koko, who now has Play Rough and Close Combat for STAB options, allowing to it take advantage of its higher attack. So yeah, I can definitively see a problem there with the introductions of TRS.


Before I go into replying to posts related to Gen 1 and being Overrated, I'd like to say that I started with Gen 4, so does that make me a new fan or an old fan?
So I guess that's one possible reason. But there's more. Personally, I find gen 1 to be obsolete and outdated. I tried to replay Red one last time in 2006 and I couldn’t finish the main game, I found it outdated already back then. I had much more fun playing Emerald which was a more modern and better game. I did replay LeafGreen the next year though, and I had much more fun with it, I could finish the main game with ease. Overall, I find R/B/Y to be obsolete because of FR/LG.
Yeah, I agree with this. I tried play to play Yellow on the Virtual Console, but I quit after reaching Pewter City. Its far too outdated between stats, Crit mechanics, and imbalanced types to name a few things I could not stand. There's no reason to play the original games over FRLG and Let's Go unless you want HA Pokemon or a specific combination of moves that can only be obtained in Gen 1.

I'm also playing Silver on the Virtual Console, and while I can play through it, I'd much rather play HGSS since they have so many QOL changes like the Stones being avalible in the pre ending, the whole Route 48, better distrubution of Pokemon types, and Pokeathlon. I definitely recommend HGSS over GSC unless you are into HAs and Pokemon with unique movesets.

This was notable in the past, and it still is nowadays. If you go to social medias or general gaming sites and look for a discussion about Pokémon, it will very likely feature former Pokémon fans who hate the newer generations. I’m not sure if it was worse in the past but it still exists nowadays at least. One recent situation I remember was when I saw someone make a discussion thread for Sword/Shield on a general gaming site I used to go to. The very first reply in that thread was from a former Pokémon fan who spewed nostalgia-blind hatred for all new Pokémon. I found it really annoying to see that happening, and that’s one of the many reasons as for why I left that site. I am very happy to see that something like this almost never happens on actual Pokémon sites like here on Smogon, there are very few former Pokémon fans here, there are way more current Pokémon fans instead. I think that is great and that is one reason I stick with these forums.
That's really not a Pokemon problem though. Its a fandom problem. If you go to pretty much any video game forums, you encounter people who think the new games are awful and prefer the old ones. If you go to the Fire Emblem Forums you'll find people complaining about how 3 Houses is the worst because you have to dedicate time to do tea parties in order to get stat buffs or how the series has become so "anime", or how the Persona Forums complains how Persona 5 is too easy.

hich does a lot of improvements and fixes several issues with the first pairs, improving on them in many important aspects. However, this also comes at the cost of the first pairs becoming obsolete, there is zero reason to return to D/P or S/M when you can play the better versions in form of Platinum and US/UM instead.
Disagree that USM completely outclass SM. The original pair has a much better story, which USM butchered. If you prefer story driven games, then SM might be worth choosing over USM in that regard. Gameplay wise though, USM are the winners here.
The idea of RBY being obsolete doesn't make that much sense to me. The games have some of the most connectivity of any Pokemon game in the series, only rivalled by the Game Boy Advance titles. Pokemon Stadium, for example, gives you incredible reward for playing around with the Game Boy titles, and a lot more bang for your buck. While the Game Boy Advance games have connectivity with the GameCube, it can hardly be compared in terms of how much mileage you get for it. And this is just one of the games you can connect with; there's inter-generation connectivity with GSC and Stad2. Not to mention the completely different battle mechanics providing some of the most unique experiences of any Pokemon generation.
Really? You can get rewards for connecting RBY to Stadium? I find that bizarre that people are praising Stadium for that. Battle Revolution got lukewarm reception for requiring DP to open up the game.
I think LGPE was important since Kanto wasn't on the DS-3DS family prior. As of ORAS, it was the only region not playable on that family of systems, until the Virtual Console versions came out. It was a pretty big nightmare to get hold of Kanto until that happened. I think it's a bit of a goalpost-moving thing to say Meltan and Melmetal don't count since they were there to advertise GO, which isn't Kanto at all. Hell, LGPE's entire concept was bringing Pokemon GO into a "mainline" setting. It's definitely a Kanto game, but to say it's specifically only about Yellow is a misunderstanding at best.
Kanto was on the DS. It was part of HGSS. Gen 5 was the first Gen that Kanto was inaccessible.
Gen 1 gets the most attention, to absolutely no one's surprise or shock, because it's the easiest way to advertise. Familiarity is very important in the advertising field, as it ensures the brand remains commonplace and "too big to fail". It's like how Disney has always been Mickey Mouse, and not the new characters, see? Who would be receptive to Sudowoodo and Aurorus on a poster advertising Pokemon? Likely only fans who exist already. Once we leave Game Freak's advertising department, I see more love for literally anything else, and I think that's a good thing. Look at when Wooloo was revealed and the internet exploded, that's great! But, I don't see why Game Freak's advertising should justify it? It's nothing to do with the games, after all.

I think LGPE was important since Kanto wasn't on the DS-3DS family prior. As of ORAS, it was the only region not playable on that family of systems, until the Virtual Console versions came out. It was a pretty big nightmare to get hold of Kanto until that happened. I think it's a bit of a goalpost-moving thing to say Meltan and Melmetal don't count since they were there to advertise GO, which isn't Kanto at all. Hell, LGPE's entire concept was bringing Pokemon GO into a "mainline" setting. It's definitely a Kanto game, but to say it's specifically only about Yellow is a misunderstanding at best.

A minor correction on the note of Gen 6 beginning the "Kanto fever"; Gen 1 has always been the thing getting attention. It's a staple of the brand, here's some examples generation-wise;
  • Gen 2 was designed as a sequel to Gen 1, and it's partly why there's a lot of Kanto in the early-game.
  • Gen 3 had FRLG
  • Gen 4 Evolved many Kanto Pokemon
  • Gen 5 used Gen 1 Pokemon as a focal point of their designs, there are interviews about this. Take Bouffalant to Tauros, for example. I personally think it was an amazing idea, and the execution was super cool.
    • A few interviews; here and here. There's more, but I don't have them on me.
Yes, we all know that Gen 1 is the most marketable, which is why that group is constantly being used to market. I would also point out that DP had regional dex of 151 Pokemon, same as Kanto. There are two problems people have with Kanto and terms of marketing: #1: Yes Kanto, Pokemon are recognizable. But Pokemon is such a strong brand , they can afford to take risks and still make a ton of money. The fact that Mega Evolution was spread among Pokemon was godsend for Pokemon like Mawile and Ampharos, outclassed Pokemon. On contrary, SM had Alola forms, but they were Kanto only. SM in general are full of Kanto references that its hard not to think of Kanto, when discussing Alola, some examples include more Kanto Pokemon than Alola Pokemon in the regional dex, and things like the Kantonian Gym or the player from being the Kanto. Or that exclusive Z-Moves were either Alola or Kanto Mons. Yes, there were a lot of Gen 1 Megas, but t there was also a fair amount of Pokemon from different all the generations. But recently, all the decisions have been done because Gen 1 Pokemon are the most profitable and can promote a new game strongly. However, this brings me to point #2: The same Pokemon keep getting all the attention. This is the batch of Pokemon that seems to go to go for advertising: Kanto Starters, Pikachu, Eevee/lutions, Gengar, Mewtwo, and Snorlax. However, this is the only batch of Pokemon that get fan service. All of these Pokemon have gotten a slice of super mechanic, and most of them except Mewtwo have had two slices. People weren't complaining when Beedrill, Pidgeot, and Butterfree got a Mega Evolution or a Gigantamax. People were complaining that the Kanto Starters had a second set of super forms despite already having Megas. Gengar, Eevee, Pikachu, and Snorlax either had a Mega or a Z-Move. Meowth got another regional form despite already having a Gigantamax and a regional form in SM? Why not give it to Glameow? Glameow has only appeared in Pearl, White 2, and ORAS, and a regional form could definitely boost their Popularity. Nothing for the likes of Dewgong, Venomoth, or Golduck as well. The fact that GF reuses this batch of Pokemon when advertising is my number one gripe with Kanto Pandering in general.
 
Several unpopular opinions
-I'm not a fan of Gen 4 battle themes, including HG/SS
Exceptions being Cynthia's theme (which improved in BW), and Battle Frontier (Which Emerald's is better)

But overall I'm not a fan of most of Gen 4s. And it's weird cuz, the town themes are niiiiice

Similarly, not a fan of FRLG remixes. Oddly it didn't even feel like RSEs music despite using the same soundfont. I heard better fan remixes with the RSE soundfont there as well

It's funny. I trash Gen 4 a lot despite the resurgence for Gen 4 love these days...
 
Several unpopular opinions
-I'm not a fan of Gen 4 battle themes, including HG/SS
Exceptions being Cynthia's theme (which improved in BW), and Battle Frontier (Which Emerald's is better)

But overall I'm not a fan of most of Gen 4s. And it's weird cuz, the town themes are niiiiice

Similarly, not a fan of FRLG remixes. Oddly it didn't even feel like RSEs music despite using the same soundfont. I heard better fan remixes with the RSE soundfont there as well

It's funny. I trash Gen 4 a lot despite the resurgence for Gen 4 love these days...
Yeah, I was never a fan of gen 4's music either. The compositions are fine, but the instrumentation left something to be desired, specifically from the Diamond and Pearl tracks. Most of HGSS's soundtrack & the new tracks added in Platinum sound much better because of the improved instrumentation.
 

Plague von Karma

Gyda'n gilydd, nawr!
is a Pokemon Researcher
Before I go into replying to posts related to Gen 1 and being Overrated, I'd like to say that I started with Gen 4, so does that make me a new fan or an old fan?
Definitely an old fan! Gen 4 is over a decade old!

Yeah, I agree with this. I tried play to play Yellow on the Virtual Console, but I quit after reaching Pewter City. Its far too outdated between stats, Crit mechanics, and imbalanced types to name a few things I could not stand. There's no reason to play the original games over FRLG and Let's Go unless you want HA Pokemon or a specific combination of moves that can only be obtained in Gen 1.
I don't see how the Speed-based crit mechanics are "outdated" at all, there's a good few RPGs I can think of that have done a similar thing. While not identical, for a "familiar" example, Fire Emblem uses the Skill stat iirc? If you want to go over something that's "outdated", there's dozens of other things you can easily talk about. This isn't one of them.

There are many more reasons to play Gen 1, such as:
  • Wanting good Pokemon in Gen 2, which in turn can be used to make unique sets for Gen 7-8. In Crystal, many Gen 1 TMs make Egg Moves, such as Submission Typhlosion.
  • The Stadium games hold up surprisingly well and are quite rewarding.
  • As with any first game in any franchise, many want to experience the roots, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Should also note that, once again, nobody needs a "reason" to play a game. There is nothing wrong with playing a game solely because you feel like it.

Really? You can get rewards for connecting RBY to Stadium? I find that bizarre that people are praising Stadium for that. Battle Revolution got lukewarm reception for requiring DP to open up the game.
This only tells me you've not played Stadium before, as the two are largely without comparison imo. Stadium was far more flexible than Battle Revolution, and that was partly why the latter wasn't the most liked. Stadium allowed you to at least use what you wanted without a game inserted. The rewards you get from Stadium were also pretty damn good, such as Amnesia Psyduck and a Surfing Pikachu.

Kanto was on the DS. It was part of HGSS. Gen 5 was the first Gen that Kanto was inaccessible.
I meant moreso the "original" Kanto storyline, but you're right.

Yes, we all know that Gen 1 is the most marketable, which is why that group is constantly being used to market. I would also point out that DP had regional dex of 151 Pokemon, same as Kanto. There are two problems people have with Kanto and terms of marketing:
That's actually interesting, didn't know DP Sinnoh Dex was like that.

#1: Yes Kanto, Pokemon are recognizable. But Pokemon is such a strong brand , they can afford to take risks and still make a ton of money. The fact that Mega Evolution was spread among Pokemon was godsend for Pokemon like Mawile and Ampharos, outclassed Pokemon. On contrary, SM had Alola forms, but they were Kanto only. SM in general are full of Kanto references that its hard not to think of Kanto, when discussing Alola, some examples include more Kanto Pokemon than Alola Pokemon in the regional dex, and things like the Kantonian Gym or the player from being the Kanto. Or that exclusive Z-Moves were either Alola or Kanto Mons. Yes, there were a lot of Gen 1 Megas, but t there was also a fair amount of Pokemon from different all the generations. But recently, all the decisions have been done because Gen 1 Pokemon are the most profitable and can promote a new game strongly.
If you think any big brand are going to take risks, especially a Nintendo brand, there's a...lot to go over. Pokemon has had to play it safe ever since the PR nightmares it had in 1997-2000. Gen 3 almost killed the series at the time too, you'd be surprised. It's since resulted in the franchise playing it far safer than before. Is it a good thing? No, I personally dislike it myself. But, the best I can do for you is to try and explain why it's like that.

However, this brings me to point #2: The same Pokemon keep getting all the attention. This is the batch of Pokemon that seems to go to go for advertising: Kanto Starters, Pikachu, Eevee/lutions, Gengar, Mewtwo, and Snorlax. However, this is the only batch of Pokemon that get fan service. All of these Pokemon have gotten a slice of super mechanic, and most of them except Mewtwo have had two slices. People weren't complaining when Beedrill, Pidgeot, and Butterfree got a Mega Evolution or a Gigantamax. People were complaining that the Kanto Starters had a second set of super forms despite already having Megas. Gengar, Eevee, Pikachu, and Snorlax either had a Mega or a Z-Move. Meowth got another regional form despite already having a Gigantamax and a regional form in SM? Why not give it to Glameow? Glameow has only appeared in Pearl, White 2, and ORAS, and a regional form could definitely boost their Popularity. Nothing for the likes of Dewgong, Venomoth, or Golduck as well. The fact that GF reuses this batch of Pokemon when advertising is my number one gripe with Kanto Pandering in general.
The same Pokemon are used because, as you and me have agreed, they're familiar. Familiarity is one of the focal points of advertising, it's a tried and true method as seen with how Disney works. Same stuff, different day, all culminates in helping a brand become commonplace. Unless something is an absolute smash hit, Disney forgets about its new movie and basically acts as if they never existed. Nintendo and Game Freak are extremely similar in this regard. Is it a good thing? No, personally I'd love to see Gen 2 get more than it does, but that's just how it is. Best I can do is try to understand the reasoning, and that's ok, I've got plenty of other things to pay attention to. On a personal note, I hate getting angry about things since it's just unhealthy.

My main issue with the whole "Kanto pandering" crew is they tend to try to gatekeep anyone who plays the original games. I have never seen a community that actively tries to tell people not to. Hell, even in the SMT fandom I've seen people say "Hey if you ever wanna see how the franchise evolved, play the original! It's got hilarious balancing and is an interesting experience!". Same for Fire Emblem, Metroid, but the only one I've seen where people will actively try to reason you to go somewhere else is so weird. At the end of the day, you don't need a reason to play a game. Video games aren't a political field, they're leisure time. It's all about just playing what you want and having fun with it. You can beat Gen 1 in around 6 hours if you know what you're doing, it doesn't hurt anyone!
 
Replaying the first two Generations via VC reminded me just how badly RBY aged with its barebones interface, lack of descriptors for moves/items, and item organization, not even getting into its hilarious balancing issues. I still love the games but they don't really hold up for their gameplay (heck, I'd argue the story and world design are some of the best aspects of the games; I love the flexibility in Kanto's layout). GSC has small but very noticeable improvements when checking the Pokémon status screen, actual item descriptions (especially for TMs), and the multiple item pockets which means you're not limited by item storage space nearly enough. They suffer for other reasons but they aren't nearly as much of a chore to play.
 
This created quite a discussion. Guess I should have expected that. Time for replies! If I don't reply to a specific part of someone's post, it means I have nothing to say or mostly agree.
WOW WHO COULDVE GUESSED
(also much of the "hate" is good as criticism and directing anger towards someting at all. its such a general term and so easy to fit, like how you use it)
Spreading love instead of hate should be an easy thing to do, but it becomes hard when you are surrounded by negativity, or when you really like something but only see negativity towards it everywhere. At least that's how it is for me.

And it can be hard to draw the line between hate and criticism, good point there. I tried to be constructive in my last post (and I'm trying the same here), but it isn’t always easy.
the difference is (i think) that Plat just better, while USM either had flaws the originals didn't have, or maintained them. namely the story and tutorials. Also usm being part of 'new' pokemon while plat being old and being in 2 versions instead of one, and how close they are to the present.
(i actually dont know much about sm vs usm)
This is also a good point. While US/UM improves upon S/M, I agree they could have done even more and even better improvements. They are also a step down in difference from the first pair compared to how different B2/W2 were to B/W. But for me, the things they do are enough. I think they are an improvement on the whole, which is why I consider them better than S/M.
From my experience, Gen 5 seems to be on an upturn in terms of who likes it. Maybe it's just the friend circles I've found myself in, but especially with that Poke Classic Network thing from 2018, people have been flocking back and enjoying it much more. I believe the competitive scene also has a lot of devout players. Not saying this to deny your experience, because it's clearly happened and is very unfortunate, but I encourage you to look around! In these cases, I recommend trying to find dedicated communities for the games!
You’re right, it has definitely gained an upturn in recent times, which is of course something I appreciate! But as said, it seems like the haters has become more vocal because of that too, which is sad to see. I guess I should try to find more dedicated communities, but I usually have a hard time getting into new forums and communities so I don’t know. Then I don't have as much interest in forums as I used to, and I have less time as well. So it will probably not happen.
As an old fan, I draw a lot of parallels between "the nostalgia-fueled hatred of newer games" with the newer players having extreme distaste for the old games. There's very little difference between them, both are extremely toxic and tend to just drive the community division further. I often hear the same recycled ideas about why the old games are the devilspawn of man and are "objectively bad" messes that should have never been made. The idea of something being "objectively" bad is already a preposterous idea considering human individuality, but anyway, not the thread for that. Personally, I'm of the opinion that if someone enjoys it, there's no need to ambush them on their way home and drag them to bad opinion jail.
Good point. I also think it is stupid to say a game or a generation is "objectively bad" (I once got angry at another user for saying that regarding a game earlier in this thread, it is on the first post, be sure to look it up if you want to see a really bad post from me lol). If anything, this discussion proves that R/B/Y are not objectively bad because you like some things that I dislike about them, making things subjective in the end.
The idea of RBY being obsolete doesn't make that much sense to me. The games have some of the most connectivity of any Pokemon game in the series, only rivalled by the Game Boy Advance titles. Pokemon Stadium, for example, gives you incredible reward for playing around with the Game Boy titles, and a lot more bang for your buck. While the Game Boy Advance games have connectivity with the GameCube, it can hardly be compared in terms of how much mileage you get for it. And this is just one of the games you can connect with; there's inter-generation connectivity with GSC and Stad2. Not to mention the completely different battle mechanics providing some of the most unique experiences of any Pokemon generation.
Connectivity does nothing to me if I can’t connect the games to anything. I never owned the Stadium games or even an N64, so that does not affect my opinion of the games. Besides, if you need an extra side-game to get the most out of the main game, it just shows that the main games are lacking in content and features on their own. I don’t care much for the different battle mechanics either, but that’s because I prefer the newer mechanics.

But this is beside the point. The main reason I consider R/B/Y obsolete (for me personally) is because of FR/LG. They do everything that I expect from Kanto but they are better than R/B/Y in every way that matters for me, so I have no reason to play R/B/Y nowadays.
It's hard to understand just how much ground Pokemon broke in the 90s, especially for fans who weren't heavily into it back then. At the time, the internet was in its infancy, and there were very few games of a scale akin to what Pokemon had. You can look around, the only comparable titles would be The Legend of Zelda on the NES or something like that. This resulted in the game blowing up in popularity in a way only really replicated by Minecraft. It spawned merchandise in almost every way you could possibly imagine, and the events...oh man, the events. The competitive scene was even televised in Japan, as I said in my OP. The level of influence Pokemon had during the 90s cannot be overstated. The way it bounced back after the Pokemon Shock event of 1997 is also something to behold. Of course, this is an abbreviated history, and I don't think it'd satisfy you at all, but I thought I'd give some input. Did the games age well? Probably not, but compared to other Game Boy games, it's definitely stood the test of time. I'd argue many are borderline unplayable. Super Mario Land 2 could probably fit on a GBA though, man that game looks pretty.
I remember when Pokémon was super popular back in the late 90s. At least the TCG, and the anime to an extent, not so much the actual games (at least at first) even if they also did get their fair share of attention. It was to the point that it needed no advertising because it practically advertised itself. I remember that basically everyone at my school was into it. The ironic thing is that I was personally not very interested in Pokemon at first, it seemed overrated and I distanced myself from it. Then I gradually got more and more interested and now I’m still a fan, 20 years later! It is crazy. The same thing happened with Go when it first was released, it became so popular that it basically advertised itself.

I do personally not think the games have aged well, but as you say, that can probably be said for a lot of other GBC games too. Haven’t played many other GBC games than Pokémon, just a few old Lego games I think, so I can’t really say.
I mean, if you want characters from other gens to get more attention, well, you can always do it yourself. If you find it annoying, I believe that to be a personal problem. Liking something is very subjective, and what someone likes isn't to your taste, that's ok! There's nothing wrong with that, and nobody should fault you for it.
This is a good point, and something I have thought about as well. I think I have done some posts where I give praise to Pokémon and characters from the newer generations, I should continue with that. Right now I have an idea for a post about a Pokémon/family that I really want to give praise to for a certain unique trait it has, I suppose I should focus on completing that post. Obviously, it is not a Pokémon from Gen 1.
I can agree that the baseline story for Kanto is pretty bland. Pokemon has never necessarily been about the story, I believe Gen 4 was when they actually started to try on that note, before Gen 5 came in with that showstopper. FRLG hardly even worked on improving the story either, let alone Blue. It's the weakest part of Gen 1 as a whole. You can link it to how games were made at the time, storytelling wasn't really a central focus back then. I wish FRLG modernized it, really. This is partly why I say RBY isn't ageing the greatest.
I agree that FR/LG should have improved the story more. While I like them and most of their improvements over R/B/Y, the story and the rival were two very notable things they didn't improve upon in any significant way.
I personally like most of the designs, but that's my familiarity speaking. Rhydon, Dodrio, Venusaur, Chansey and Vaporeon are my personal favourites!
As said, I like several too, some of my favorites are Alakazam, Starmie, Dodrio, Primeape, Hitmonlee, Gengar, Snorlax, Dragonite, Moltres and Mewtwo… and many others!

But at the same time, there are many that just feel boring and uninteresting to me. Some examples are Arcanine, Golbat, Machamp, Fearow, Pidgeot, Kingler, Poliwrath, Raticate, Seaking, Mew... and others. So on the whole, I think Gen 1 has the worst designs, not because every single design is bad, but because I think it has more bad designs on the whole compared to every other generation.
I highly doubt Gen 1 Pokemon are "immune to criticism". Whenever a "Pokemon has bad designs these days" argument spouts up, the first thing I see people go to is Gen 1 designs. Exeggcute, Diglett -> Dugtrio, Magneton, etc are consistently bought up there and torn to shreds. I rarely, if ever, see any other Pokemon designs bought up in those debates.
You are partly correct, but whenever someone criticizes a Gen 1 design, it seems that someone else will then immediately defend the gen 1 designs, often by saying “they were the original” or something similar. This does not happen to new designs; they get criticized without anyone really defending them in the same way. The Gen 1 Pokémon also never seem to get any hate when they are brought up, everyone is okay with them but every new Pokémon gets hate.
The bit about only seeing Kanto in Kanto games is kind of what you'd expect in the games, really. RSE, DP and BW all did the same thing, and it's just a series formula. In BW specifically, they made it extremely hard to find any old Pokemon, which is where a lot of the animosity towards it came from on the initial release.
My point (which I suppose I should have explained better) was that you only see Kanto Pokémon even in the remakes when they should have had Pokédex expansions. Granted, this is an aspect I think all the remakes could have been better at, so this isn’t only an issue with FR/LG and LGP/E. Plus the more personal reason in that I have gotten tired of the Kanto Pokémon so playing a game where I can only see them during the main story doesn’t really appeal to me anymore.
I personally like Yellow's sprites, though RG and RB's designs were definitely not the finest. For what Game Freak was at the time though, I give em props. In the grand scheme of things though, you can see why they never imported RG's sprites.
Same here, even though I don’t think Yellow are that good compared to the newer generations. But hey, better than nothing.
The open nature is more wasted potential than something unnecessary imo. Pokemon Crystal Clear, a ROM Hack, shows exactly what could be done to RBY. I think there is a hack that opens up the region more and adds level scaling, but I can't remember the name if it does exist. I don't think modern Game Freak not knowing how to make an open region is a relevant point though, given this is a game from 1996...
Pretty much this. I once saw a post here where someone said that open regions in Pokémon is pointless at best and harmful at worst, which I agree with. I don’t play romhacks and have no real interest in them so can’t speak for that.

My point about modern Game Freak was more directed to the wild area in S/S It has potential but there’s a lot of improvements that they need to do in order to make it function better. I think the Isle of Armor improved upon it but there's still room for a lot more improvements to make it even better. That’s for another discussion though.
Regarding the "third version" bit, this is a common misconception. In Japan, Yellow was released alongside an "official" release of Japanese Blue, after the latter was put on a special mail order in Corocoro 2 years prior. You could take them as sequel games in this case, though it's mostly semantics and puts em more with BW2 and USUM.
I had no idea about this. Thanks for letting me know.
Even then, though...I'm not sure what you're really expecting from Yellow. It improves the sprites, fixes many of the bugs (Old Man Glitch, for example), and makes many learnset improvements. It even added moves to multiple Pokemon, such as Kinesis Kadabra and Low Kick Mankey. For the first shot at a new version, they did a damn good job. I personally find Yellow to be among the best Game Boy titles out there, it's graphically stellar and gameplay-wise it's definitely among the best RPGs of the system.
I guess I shouldn’t expect too much, it just doesn’t do much for me compared to the newer follow-up games, and as said, I find it worse than R/B on the whole. Gen 1 is the only generation from which I prefer the first pair over the third/alternate version.
This feels a bit like gatekeeping; you don't need a reason to play a game, let alone a "good" one. That's all I'll say here.
I was thinking about how some people play the gen 1 games specifically to play around with glitches without caring much for the actual games themselves. I also remember some people being angry at the possible idea of the VC releases of the Gen 1 games fixing glitches and that they wouldn’t get the games if the glitches were fixed. But now that the VC releases kept all the glitches, I guess they are happy. I just personally find the glitches overrated. But if people want to play the games for them, I guess there's nothing stopping them. So while I personally find playing a game only for the glitches is stupid, I guess others can play which games they want for whatever reason they want.
And I agree, no game is immune to criticism, and lord knows I wish the x/256 accuracy issue didn't exist.
It’s funny how you mention it because I remember encountering this issue while playing R/B/Y at times. One specific instance I remember is when a friend of mine was playing Yellow, and then suddenly he says: “What? Thunderbolt missed?” meaning he encountered the issue.
Gen 1 gets the most attention, to absolutely no one's surprise or shock, because it's the easiest way to advertise. Familiarity is very important in the advertising field, as it ensures the brand remains commonplace and "too big to fail". It's like how Disney has always been Mickey Mouse, and not the new characters, see? Who would be receptive to Sudowoodo and Aurorus on a poster advertising Pokemon? Likely only fans who exist already. Once we leave Game Freak's advertising department, I see more love for literally anything else, and I think that's a good thing. Look at when Wooloo was revealed and the internet exploded, that's great! But, I don't see why Game Freak's advertising should justify it? It's nothing to do with the games, after all.
Is that really so? To me, it feels like showcasing gen 1 over and over again is just trying to bring back former Pokémon fans (those who played only Gen 1 and nothing else). If they show Pokemon from gen 2-8, that will probably only attract current fans, sure. But what about the potential fans? As in, those who aren't Pokémon fans but has the potential to become fans. What appeals the most to them? I wish I had the answer but in theory it shouldn’t matter to a kid nowadays if they see an advertisement featuring a Gen 1 Pokemon or one from any other generation if they know nothing about Pokémon before. Don’t know if that’s how it actually is though.

I also wonder if they really advertise the gen 1 Pokémon because they are the most popular. I think it might actually be the other way around. The gen 1 Pokemon are the most popular because they get advertised all the time. It is a sort of self-fulfilling cycle I guess. The Gen 1 Pokémon are popular, they get advertised, they get more popular, they get advertised again, they get even more popular, they get advertised once more... and so on.

And I don’t see love for everything else apart from Game Freak, it still feels like gen 1 gets a fair share of attention here and there. But I guess it isn't quite as bad as it was in the past, so that's good. But still, even if showing Gen 1 and only Gen 1 is good from an advertising standpoint, that doesn’t change the fact that me and other fans are getting tired of seeing Gen 1 getting advertised everywhere, with everything from Gen 2 to the generation before the current not getting any focus at all.
I think LGPE was important since Kanto wasn't on the DS-3DS family prior. As of ORAS, it was the only region not playable on that family of systems, until the Virtual Console versions came out. It was a pretty big nightmare to get hold of Kanto until that happened. I think it's a bit of a goalpost-moving thing to say Meltan and Melmetal don't count since they were there to advertise GO, which isn't Kanto at all. Hell, LGPE's entire concept was bringing Pokemon GO into a "mainline" setting. It's definitely a Kanto game, but to say it's specifically only about Yellow is a misunderstanding at best.
IMO, Kanto does not need to be on every single system. It would be nice if they could take a break from it for once. Re-releasing the gen 1 and 2 games on the 3DS VC was okay though, especially in comparison to creating LGP/E. And just to remind you, GO was Kanto and only Kanto back when it was first released. And you can still only bring Kanto Pokemon from GO to Let’s Go. As for Meltan and Melmetal, I did not count them because they are only 2 out of 153 Pokémon. And now that I look at it, the only way to get them is from Pokémon Go, which means you can't get them in LGP/E alone, which is another reason as for why they shouldn't be counted.
A minor correction on the note of Gen 6 beginning the "Kanto fever"; Gen 1 has always been the thing getting attention. It's a staple of the brand, here's some examples generation-wise;

Gen 2 was designed as a sequel to Gen 1, and it's partly why there's a lot of Kanto in the early-game.
Gen 3 had FRLG
Gen 4 Evolved many Kanto Pokemon
Gen 5 used Gen 1 Pokemon as a focal point of their designs, there are interviews about this. Take Bouffalant to Tauros, for example. I personally think it was an amazing idea, and the execution was super cool.
I think Merritt more or less answered this, but I'll chime in as well. The thing is that in Gen 3-5, Kanto was not quite as present in every main series game as it is now. Hoenn, Sinnoh and Unova could stand on their own without major references, only minor ones at best. You never saw anyone getting annoyed at how Kanto was present everywhere in these three regions, compared to how it is with Kalos and Alola, and Galar to an extent. From Gen 6 and on, Kanto has been given a major presence not only in the remakes but in the new main series games as well, to extents that could not be seen in Gen 3-5. That's why people are annoyed, and why fan pandering has became a big term (though I do agree that it has been getting overused as of late). And even if you or other people aren't bothered by the Gen 1 fan pandering or you may even like it, that doesn't change the fact that it has happened and that it keeps happening.

Also, if we go by your perspective and say that Kanto has had a big presence in Gen 3-5 as well, that’s all the more reason me and other fans are tired of seeing it everywhere. Can we ever get a generation without Kanto? Probably not. The closest was Gen 5 if you ask me.
Pokemon Origins, I mean, ok? Chronicles existed too, it's not a new thing to go back to old stuff during a generation. It happened to be Kanto at the time, and personally I'd love to see the concept re-imagined for Gens 2-3. As for merchandise, that goes way beyond Kanto and you absolutely know that. Take, for example, the plushes, they have them for every region.
I have to admit I never watched Origins (one reason being that it was Gen 1 only and it was released at a time when I had a big distaste for Gen 1) but I would have been okay with if they had did the same to more generations. Which they of course didn’t they dropped it right after Gen 1 and only Gen 1 for the first but not last time. Could have been because Origins got a bit of a lukewarm reception though, I don’t know.

I looked up Pokemon Chronicles and it seems like there hasn’t been anything new about it since 2006 (Gen 3). So I don't really know about it.

That said, the animation specials have been getting better at showcasing other generations lately. Pokémon Generations focused on all the first 6 generations, while the recent Twilight Wings was about Galar (it could still be argued that some Gen 1 Pokémon got a bit too much spotlight in it though, but I disgress). I think both of these animation series were really great too.

It seems I was wrong regarding merchandise though, so I’ll give you that. I saw a post here a while ago saying that merchandise was always gen 1, the current gen or Eeveelutions. I should have researched it a bit more, I guess. But it seems like things have changed regarding the merchandise and that all generations get a bit of focus, so that's good! Now it could still be so that there's more merchandise for Gen 1 than any other generation, but I don't know.

I also remembered two more games with 100% focus on Gen 1. Pokémon Quest and the recently released Pokémon Smile. Those are other examples of where Gen 1 and only Gen 1 gets the full focus and attention.
The Pokemon anime dedicates almost everything to the current generation at hand, I really don't know what you're on about here. They had Iris and Dawn get featured a ton in later seasons, and that's the least of it. Brock and Misty had been anime staples until what, Gen 6? I don't see why them coming back would even be related to the whole "pandering", it's basic familiarity and a return to the normal material. This feels like a massive reach. Are you sure you're not just looking for something to hate at that point?
Perhaps I shouldn’t have said something here. I was trying to find more examples, not looking for something to hate. I don’t watch the anime so I was just bringing up things I have heard and seen from it, guess I shouldn't have done so. But from what I can find, Iris never really reappeared after B/W? And my point was that Brock and Misty were the only ones that got back in S/M, none of the other travelling companions from the other regions/generations/seasons.
As someone who plays competitive RBY and got badged solely for my contributions to the sim, I will say you're definitely very wrong. Compared to newer generations, I would say this is a myth. The worst part of the RNG is a 10% chance to freeze which is death, but outside of this, I would argue it's among the more skill-based games. I mean, you could throw the x/256 uncertainty in, but that's a universal accuracy decrease of .2-.4%, which is hardly anything. There's a ton of interesting mechanics outside of this, such as the type-based secondary effect immunity I talked about in my post. It adds tons of dimensions to strategy that I find extremely enjoyable. You can ask any competitive RBY player and they will all tell you that the "RBY is luck-based" trope is an extremely false claim to make. Shellnuts in the RoA room on PS smashes the argument day-in-day-out. If you wanted to criticise the meta, you could easily bring up The Big 4, Reflect, or WrapSwitching, but even then, a lot of the time people would tell you to check out UU, which mostly diminishes this.
I'll take your word for it then. I have to admit that this has gotten me a bit interested in how the Gen 1 metagame works but I guess that's for another time.
It feels like you're more disillusioned by the advertising Game Freak does, and I think it's perfectly justified. Though at the same time, it comes off as slight confirmation bias. It's not a bad thing, and I can tell you've been through the wars of the BW era, and I can't fault you for it. I'm happy to debate further if you're up for it, I enjoy long posts like these.
Maybe. Am I really "disillusioned" though? It feels weird, but maybe that's how it is. Or are you the one who is "disillusioned"? Maybe we both are! Actually, I don't know.

I enjoy discussions like this too but writing all this takes a very long time and I somewhat regret making that post yesterday, but at the same time I felt that I had to say something so here we are. I feel that my post of today won't be as good because I am tired and have spent too much time on this, but I felt that it had to be done so yeah.

And I'm not done yet, there's more to say.
Before I go into replying to posts related to Gen 1 and being Overrated, I'd like to say that I started with Gen 4, so does that make me a new fan or an old fan?
I guess you are technically a middle fan (if such a term even exists), but on the whole I'd also say you're an older fan at this point since it has been 13/14 years since Gen 4 was first released.
That's really not a Pokemon problem though. Its a fandom problem. If you go to pretty much any video game forums, you encounter people who think the new games are awful and prefer the old ones. If you go to the Fire Emblem Forums you'll find people complaining about how 3 Houses is the worst because you have to dedicate time to do tea parties in order to get stat buffs or how the series has become so "anime", or how the Persona Forums complains how Persona 5 is too easy.
This is sad to hear, but now that I think about it, you are right. I don't interact with many fandoms and communities outside of Pokémon but I have seen a bit of this behavior in the few ones I have visited, so I guess that's true. Maybe I just thought it was worse for Pokémon since I spend so much time on Pokémon forums and sites.
Disagree that USM completely outclass SM. The original pair has a much better story, which USM butchered. If you prefer story driven games, then SM might be worth choosing over USM in that regard. Gameplay wise though, USM are the winners here.
I had a feeling someone would mention the story. I agree that the story is better in S/M, but for me, that's not enough of a reason to replay S/M over US/UM, story isn't that important to me while I think all the improvements in US/UM are way more important. That's just why I think S/M are obsolete though, if you or anyone else still wants to play S/M for the story or any other reason, that's fine.
My main issue with the whole "Kanto pandering" crew is they tend to try to gatekeep anyone who plays the original games. I have never seen a community that actively tries to tell people not to. Hell, even in the SMT fandom I've seen people say "Hey if you ever wanna see how the franchise evolved, play the original! It's got hilarious balancing and is an interesting experience!". Same for Fire Emblem, Metroid, but the only one I've seen where people will actively try to reason you to go somewhere else is so weird. At the end of the day, you don't need a reason to play a game. Video games aren't a political field, they're leisure time. It's all about just playing what you want and having fun with it. You can beat Gen 1 in around 6 hours if you know what you're doing, it doesn't hurt anyone!
This is a bit sad to hear. While I would personally probably not recommend the Gen 1 games to anyone, downright saying to people to not play them feels like the wrong thing to do. And in reverse, I don't think this happens from older fans to the newer games, if anything people might boycott or choose to not play them games on their own, or maybe just suggest that people not play them, but downright trying to make other people not play them is not something I have seen from older fans other than maybe extreme former Pokémon fans, which are rare.
 

Plague von Karma

Gyda'n gilydd, nawr!
is a Pokemon Researcher
Suspicious Derivative
On the note of connectivity with games like Stadium and GSC, I don't think this shows the content of the game is lacking. In fact, I think it's quite the opposite, you can get so much more playtime off of it. Training Pokemon with Stadium in mind is pretty fun and provides you with the opportunity to get out there and try to "get good" to win in the cups. Tradebacking with GSC for unique moves (eg. Amnesia Hypno) completely changes the meta as well, RBY 2k20 has been exploring it in detail. These games add content in a way that's not been seen since Gen 4, and it's kind of sad to see, in my opinion! I also believe this is why FRLG cannot outclass RBY on its own, there's numerous unique parts of the originals that just haven't been replicated at all. The mechanics, connectivity and many other parts of the generations are very different. They provide extremely different experiences overall.

If I really wanted to reach for a niche, I could say RBY and GSC are the only Pokemon games compatible with a printer :psysly:

If you're interested in RBY's competitive scene, I actually made an entire resource hub! It compiles stuff off of various competitive websites dedicated to the games. It's in my signature!
 

DreamPrince

Formerly Leader Wallace
Since we're debating whether or not Gen 1 Pokemon are the most popular or not, I looked at two polls: Pokemon's 2020 Poll Results as well as Favorite Pokemons responses that was released prior to Gen 8. For the former, the top 30 Pokemon featured 25 Pokemon that were not Gen 1, and the #1 Pokemon wasn't even Charizard. It was Greninja. In fact, Charizard and Gengar were the only two that were in the top 10 that were from Gen 1. Its worth noting that the majority of these have had received some fan service in the past, like Mega, Z-Move, or Gigantamax. I also understand that this poll did it have its structure problems, but since Greninja did place #1 is another poll, there is definitely some truth to it.

Before I go into the second poll, I would love to give credit to how well organized this information is. There are separate polls for each Gen, prior for 8, so you can see which Pokemon have been voted the most popular per gen. There's even a chart that shows percentage of Pokemon per percentage of votes. So very big thanks to the organizers!

Anyway, back onto the Pokemon data themselves, the top 4 Pokemon are from Gen 1: Charizard, Gengar, Arcanine, Bulbasaur. As for the top 30 Pokemon, 13 out of 30 Pokemon are from Gen 1. So there's more Gen 1 compared to TPC's official poll, however, the majority of Pokemon are from other generations, 17 out of 30 for other generations.

So the representation of Gen 1 in the two polls for the top 30 is roughly 30% for both polls added together. For TPC's poll separately, its 17%, while for the Favorite responses, its roughly 43%. More noticeably in the latter, the number higher.

BTW, if I did the math incorrectly, please forgive me, I'm not good at math.

Saying that Gen 1 Pokemon are more popular over the other generation's Pokemon is simply not true, as the other generations have had dominated the other two polls in both cases. I understand there's definitely more research needed, but saying that the new Pokemon can't be as popular as Gen 1 is untrue, as a Dragapult was #11 for TPC's poll one shot above Gengar.


I also agree that I feel that its a less of that the Gen 1 Pokemon are the most popular, but more like they are a favorites of the original GF staff. Charizard is the favorite of Atsuko Nishida, the character designer for the Chamander line, Pikachu, and the Eeveelutions. Vensaur and Gengar are the favorites of Ken Sugimori, another Character Designer. Satoshi Tajiri's favorite Pokemon is Poliwag. Junuchi Masuda's favorite Pokemon is Psyduck, in addition to Psyduck, Sylveon, Exeggcutor-Alola to name a few. Speaking Exeggutor, is Mr. Ishihara's favorite since RB, the first and only TPC president. These are heads of the GF since the days of RB, so its not surprising they want to create that same adventure akin to RB every time. It also points why Charizard snd friends keep getting attention. There favorites of GF, so of course they want them in the game getting super mechanics and represented- they want to relive the glory of RB.

So yeah, I strongly believe that group of Kanto mons not only because they are recognizable, but they are favorites of the original staff, despite the staff having other options for favorite Pokemon.
 
re: spinoffs
often times gen 1 is the big thing in spinoffs (go, smile, etc.) bc its just easier and more cohesive to implement
gen 1 is a "full" collection and easily recognizable, while its harder to implement other generations simply bc more dev time or game space
ofc marketability is influencing it but
Spreading love instead of hate should be an easy thing to do, but it becomes hard when you are surrounded by negativity, or when you really like something but only see negativity towards it everywhere. At least that's how it is for me.

And it can be hard to draw the line between hate and criticism, good point there. I tried to be constructive in my last post (and I'm trying the same here), but it isn’t always easy.
kinda got into 2 differing points here but hate is such an easy term to describe anything. i dont like seeing it
Saying that Gen 1 Pokemon are more popular over the other generation's Pokemon is simply not true, as the other generations have had dominated the other two polls in both cases. I understand there's definitely more research needed, but saying that the new Pokemon can't be as popular as Gen 1 is untrue, as a Dragapult was #11 for TPC's poll one shot above Gengar.
gen 1 mons had competition with each other (you could vote 1/generation). gengar was competing against pika who was competiting against charizard...

though the staff explanation def is a good one
 
Since we're debating whether or not Gen 1 Pokemon are the most popular or not, I looked at two polls: Pokemon's 2020 Poll Results as well as Favorite Pokemons responses that was released prior to Gen 8. For the former, the top 30 Pokemon featured 25 Pokemon that were not Gen 1, and the #1 Pokemon wasn't even Charizard. It was Greninja. In fact, Charizard and Gengar were the only two that were in the top 10 that were from Gen 1. Its worth noting that the majority of these have had received some fan service in the past, like Mega, Z-Move, or Gigantamax. I also understand that this poll did it have its structure problems, but since Greninja did place #1 is another poll, there is definitely some truth to it.

Before I go into the second poll, I would love to give credit to how well organized this information is. There are separate polls for each Gen, prior for 8, so you can see which Pokemon have been voted the most popular per gen. There's even a chart that shows percentage of Pokemon per percentage of votes. So very big thanks to the organizers!

Anyway, back onto the Pokemon data themselves, the top 4 Pokemon are from Gen 1: Charizard, Gengar, Arcanine, Bulbasaur. As for the top 30 Pokemon, 13 out of 30 Pokemon are from Gen 1. So there's more Gen 1 compared to TPC's official poll, however, the majority of Pokemon are from other generations, 17 out of 30 for other generations.

So the representation of Gen 1 in the two polls for the top 30 is roughly 30% for both polls added together. For TPC's poll separately, its 17%, while for the Favorite responses, its roughly 43%. More noticeably in the latter, the number higher.

BTW, if I did the math incorrectly, please forgive me, I'm not good at math.

Saying that Gen 1 Pokemon are more popular over the other generation's Pokemon is simply not true, as the other generations have had dominated the other two polls in both cases. I understand there's definitely more research needed, but saying that the new Pokemon can't be as popular as Gen 1 is untrue, as a Dragapult was #11 for TPC's poll one shot above Gengar.


I also agree that I feel that its a less of that the Gen 1 Pokemon are the most popular, but more like they are a favorites of the original GF staff. Charizard is the favorite of Atsuko Nishida, the character designer for the Chamander line, Pikachu, and the Eeveelutions. Vensaur and Gengar are the favorites of Ken Sugimori, another Character Designer. Satoshi Tajiri's favorite Pokemon is Poliwag. Junuchi Masuda's favorite Pokemon is Psyduck, in addition to Psyduck, Sylveon, Exeggcutor-Alola to name a few. Speaking Exeggutor, is Mr. Ishihara's favorite since RB, the first and only TPC presidentaking . These are heads of the GF since the days of RB, so its not surprising they want to create that same adventure akin to RB every time. It also points why Charizard snd friends keep getting attention. There favorites of GF, so of course they want them in the game getting super mechanics and represented- they want to relive the glory of RB.

So yeah, I strongly believe that group of Kanto mons not only because they are recognizable, but they are favorites of the original staff, despite the staff having other options for favorite Pokemon.
That actually make sense come to think of it. Creator favoritism is something that happens after or even during working on a fiction or franchise, but there's definitely a line where trying to relive the glory of the first installment more than once can ends up putting a wrench on the creativity process, resulting staleness.

And Pokémon is definitely guilty of letting this happening, but keep in mind that's not a problem exclusive to it when it comes to video game franchises becoming guilty of overdoing glory reliving of first or widely popular installments. While it's fair to represent Gen 1 a bit in Spin-off does to their "accessibility", there's a difference of making it so and make the game bloated with Gen 1 Pokémon.

To make it follow the Unpopular Opinion thread... Personally, Black and White having only Gen 5 Pokémon until post-game had really done more damage than good those games and should be even more criticized for. I know what you're thinking, it's also a popular opinion that fans didn't liked that there's only Gen 5 Pokémon in Black and White until the post-game, but it's much more damaging than you think, and not just sales-wise.

You gotta consider bringing back multiple Pokémon in the main game during B2W2 as an Arceus-send regardless of your opinion on those pair of games, because these three reasons are why Black + White's main game having only Gen 5 Pokémon poses a great damage to it in the long run, no matter what fans say about those first pair of games.
  • Taking the "Self-Contained" aspect too far. Not having any returning Pokémon at all until the post-game did give a legitimate reason haters give flacks to the first pair of Gen 5 games. Wanting the players to try out the new Pokémon is perfectly fine, if actually good, but doing so by having no Pokémon from previous generations at all can prove alienating. This also make a cause for the three sub-aspects below:
    • Strained Diversity. Like back in Gen 1, there's not really all that many option with only 156 options (-12 being Legends + Mythical, making 144 options overall), not helping that some were a lot rarer than they should be (like Maractus). Although it did a somewhat better job at Type diversity than previous Generations, some comes off as too similar to previous Generation Pokémon (i.e. there are comparison between the Gothitelle line and the Gardevoir line). Previous Pokémon from previous generations can be transferred, but only in post-game if I recall correctly.
      • This resulted repeated Pokémon among NPCs, which is forgivable in Gen 1 and 2, but become less and less excusable in later Generations when it comes to the region's new Pokémon.
  • Lack of Cross-Generational Additions. Now, we know that Gen 4 adds a lot of evolution + pre-evolution for Pokémon from previous generations, a few of which are certainly aren't fan favorites, but after make a complete "fresh slate" Gen 5 did, this also means no new evolution or pre-evolution at all. Gen 5 was the Generation that ends up completely dropping the concept of expanding the previous lines, and as much as I don't really think Alomomola should be an evolution of Luvdisc, the similarities is certainly striking and a missed opportunity for many fans.
    • Now Gen 6 (almost) and Gen 7 repeated that too, but at this point, fans gave up of wanting new cross-generation evolutions until Gen 8, which introduced Regional Evolutions that are generally very well received.
  • Overall Bad First Impression to Generation 5 Pokémon. Although every generation have their own suckers, some fans have a tendency to criticize or hate the likes of Garbodor and Vanilluxe to death, which is actually a result of a lack of returning Pokémon. One may say "quantity over quality" but that is difficult to say that's the opposite in Gen 6, 7 and 8 for various reasons, and it's really subjective for those cases. In Gen 5, there are so many new Pokémon that there are bound of some that ends up being too similar to previous Pokémon in the eyes of some fans, not helping that the above mentioned Garbodor and Vanilluxe, as well as the Simi Monkeys and a few other Gen 5 mons with mediocre reception, sticks out like sore thumbs in comparison to even previous generations' "Badmons" at this point.
If Gen 6, 7 or 8 repeated that mistake (while including Regional Variants), that might be even worse, as there are fewer options available. Which is definitely ridiculous to think about, since stuff like Mega Evolution or Gigantamax means of course some past Pokémon will return to get either of special treatment, but who knows if the opposite ends up happening; a new Generation with little to no new Pokémon at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Overall Bad First Impression to Generation 5 Pokémon. Although every generation have their own suckers, some fans have a tendency to criticize or hate the likes of Garbodor and Vanilluxe to death, which is actually a result of a lack of returning Pokémon. One may say "quantity over quality" but that is difficult to say that's the opposite in Gen 6, 7 and 8 for various reasons, and it's really subjective for those cases. In Gen 5, there are so many new Pokémon that there are bound of some that ends up being too similar to previous Pokémon in the eyes of some fans, not helping that the above mentioned Garbodor and Vanilluxe, as well as the Simi Monkeys and a few other Gen 5 mons with mediocre reception, sticks out like sore thumbs in comparison to even previous generations' "Badmons" at this point.
I can relate to this. When I first played Black and White back in 2010 (played the Japanese version ROM) I hated a lot of the new Pokemon because it seemed like they were replacing the older Pokemon. On there own, a lot of the Pokemon the region introduced like Simisear and Sawk are decent Pokemon, but all I could think about was how much better something like Infernape was. Combined with the much darker color pallet & atmosphere that Black and White exuded & I felt alienated at the time. BW2 fixed a lot of the issues that made BW1 feel alienating while respecting the ideas & character it introduced.
 
I can relate to this. When I first played Black and White back in 2010 (played the Japanese version ROM) I hated a lot of the new Pokemon because it seemed like they were replacing the older Pokemon. On there own, a lot of the Pokemon the region introduced like Simisear and Sawk are decent Pokemon, but all I could think about was how much better something like Infernape was. Combined with the much darker color pallet & atmosphere that Black and White exuded & I felt alienated at the time. BW2 fixed a lot of the issues that made BW1 feel alienating while respecting the ideas & character it introduced.
And you're right. While initial alienation was not really an unpopular opinion as I said, I feel like the damage Gen 5 had done is severely downplayed by fans as time passes, while personally, I feel like if Gen 5 avoided completely excluding previous generation Pokémon for the main game, the reception wouldn't be so bad. If B2W2 didn't solved that issue, the reception towards Gen 5 Pokémon would certainly not soften up a lot as time passes.
 

Yung Dramps

awesome gaming
One other big thing to note concerning BW1's soft-reboot nature of only new Pokemon crippling it is that in addition to the generally mixed reception to the Pokedex as a whole most of the actually really good and well-liked Gen 5 cast members often came far too late in the game for most players to bear with. Golurk, Haxorus, Chandelure, Bisharp, Volcarona, Hydreigon and more are all relegated to late midgame at earliest with many of them being straight up endgame-only mons. There's also the matter of the latter 3's abysmal evolution levels alongside stuff like Braviary that far exceeds the pretty low level curve for reasons that evade myself and many others. The cool pre-release Pokemon Zoroark wasn't even obtainable without an event for god's sake! This meant that until at least 2-3 badges in where you got some neato things like Scolipede and Krookodile you're forced to see and work with the mediocre early-game fluff which unlike later generations they put no effort into trying to make unique (see the massive downgrade from the still-beloved Staraptor to god damn Unfezant) or even just overused and pushed way too hard for no good reason (the monkeys and even Lillipup to an extent). All this along with the stuff others mentioned and you got a recipe for a roster of Pokemon which is the only gen aside from the extremely recent 8 to not have anyone make the Top 10 on the recent Pokemon of the Year poll.
 
  • Strained Diversity. Like back in Gen 1, there's not really all that many option with only 156 options (-12 being Legends + Mythical, making 144 options overall), not helping that some were a lot rarer than they should be (like Maractus). Although it did a somewhat better job at Type diversity than previous Generations, some comes off as too similar to previous Generation Pokémon (i.e. there are comparison between the Gothitelle line and the Gardevoir line). Previous Pokémon from previous generations can be transferred, but only in post-game if I recall correctly.
I'd gladly take only 156 options, all of them being completely new additions to the series, over 400 options of which the new ones don't even make a quarter of it (Sword and Shield).

It's the new generation, with new characters. It's the games that introduced them. It didn't work well, I've got to admit it, but giving the new characters exclusive focus was the right idea. Something Hoenn in Gen III also did, though not as well (as there were still some old Pokémon before the post-game). It's what makes Gen V much more memorable than other generations... I even remember evolutionary lines I'd rather forget (the Lillipup and Zorua lines), when in other cases I tend to forget even those I like.

If you want to make a third version or a second pair of games where both new and old get equal billing, go for it, but you can't shove the new characters into a mostly secondary role in their introductory game... it doesn't have to be AS extreme as Black and White did, but they need top billing in their first game.
 
Last edited:
I'd gladly take only 156 options, all of them being completely new additions to the series, over 400 options of which the new ones don't even make a quarter of it (Sword and Shield).

It's the new generation, with new characters. It's the games that introduced them. It didn't work well, I've got to admit it, but giving the new characters exclusive focus was the right idea. Something Hoenn in Gen III also did, though not as well (as there were still some old Pokémon before the post-game). It's what makes Gen V much more memorable than other generations... I even remember evolutionary lines I'd rather forget (the Lillipup and Zorua lines), when in other cases I tend to forget even those I like.

If you want to make a third version or a second pair of games where both new and old get equal billing, go for it, but you can't shove the new characters into a mostly secondary role in their introductory game... it doesn't have to be AS extreme as Black and White did, but they need top billing in their first game.
I do agree that putting focus on the new characters and Pokémon was the right idea. But it's the execution that leaves it to be desired concerning Pokémon, even if their exposure helped them stand out. As Yung Dramps pointed out, several of fan favorites ends up being relegated at early lategame at best, and the dumb level curve for several of them (not Volcarona since that's one powerful) also make them not giving sensitive for players to catch them in generations beyond Generation 5.

That, and how extreme Black and White did it, is what caused some fans to not have an opinion as high as other do, especially those who started in a Generation later than 5.

I definitely agree to give new Pokémon the main spotlight, though I definitely won't agree to completely exclude Pokémon from previous Generations for the main game; more or less make them much rarer and more sparsely used than the current Generation, encouraging the player to play with the new toys but also without completely excluding past Pokémon until postgame. Bloated Pokédex during main game can do the opposite problem of course; I'd rather do about 200 Pokémon (about 120 new ones, plus some additions to existing evolutionary lines as bonuses) for the main game and then another 200 for the post-game (all returning) regarding the Pokédex. "Third version" is more fair game for both sides of course.
 
On the note of connectivity with games like Stadium and GSC, I don't think this shows the content of the game is lacking. In fact, I think it's quite the opposite, you can get so much more playtime off of it. Training Pokemon with Stadium in mind is pretty fun and provides you with the opportunity to get out there and try to "get good" to win in the cups. Tradebacking with GSC for unique moves (eg. Amnesia Hypno) completely changes the meta as well, RBY 2k20 has been exploring it in detail. These games add content in a way that's not been seen since Gen 4, and it's kind of sad to see, in my opinion! I also believe this is why FRLG cannot outclass RBY on its own, there's numerous unique parts of the originals that just haven't been replicated at all. The mechanics, connectivity and many other parts of the generations are very different. They provide extremely different experiences overall.

If I really wanted to reach for a niche, I could say RBY and GSC are the only Pokemon games compatible with a printer :psysly:
I disagree about the side-games making the main games better on their own, but I do agree with you that the older generations did side-games with connections to the main games better than the newer generations. As said, I never owned the Stadium games but I did play Colosseum and XD for Gen 3 and PBR for Gen 4, those games were a ton of fun! I kinda miss these types of games for the newer generations, it seems like the concept was more or less dropped after Gen 4. Might have been because PBR got a rather negative reception in general (I liked it though).

And the printer too! That's another unique thing for Gen 1 and 2. And another thing I never got to try out since I never owned a Game Boy printer, but it seemed really cool.
If you're interested in RBY's competitive scene, I actually made an entire resource hub! It compiles stuff off of various competitive websites dedicated to the games. It's in my signature!
Thanks for the suggestion! I'm going to check it out because I am really interested in how skill plays a part in the Gen 1 metagame.
Since we're debating whether or not Gen 1 Pokemon are the most popular or not, I looked at two polls: Pokemon's 2020 Poll Results as well as Favorite Pokemons responses that was released prior to Gen 8. For the former, the top 30 Pokemon featured 25 Pokemon that were not Gen 1, and the #1 Pokemon wasn't even Charizard. It was Greninja. In fact, Charizard and Gengar were the only two that were in the top 10 that were from Gen 1. Its worth noting that the majority of these have had received some fan service in the past, like Mega, Z-Move, or Gigantamax. I also understand that this poll did it have its structure problems, but since Greninja did place #1 is another poll, there is definitely some truth to it.

Anyway, back onto the Pokemon data themselves, the top 4 Pokemon are from Gen 1: Charizard, Gengar, Arcanine, Bulbasaur. As for the top 30 Pokemon, 13 out of 30 Pokemon are from Gen 1. So there's more Gen 1 compared to TPC's official poll, however, the majority of Pokemon are from other generations, 17 out of 30 for other generations.

So the representation of Gen 1 in the two polls for the top 30 is roughly 30% for both polls added together. For TPC's poll separately, its 17%, while for the Favorite responses, its roughly 43%. More noticeably in the latter, the number higher.

Saying that Gen 1 Pokemon are more popular over the other generation's Pokemon is simply not true, as the other generations have had dominated the other two polls in both cases. I understand there's definitely more research needed, but saying that the new Pokemon can't be as popular as Gen 1 is untrue, as a Dragapult was #11 for TPC's poll one shot above Gengar.

I also agree that I feel that its a less of that the Gen 1 Pokemon are the most popular, but more like they are a favorites of the original GF staff. Charizard is the favorite of Atsuko Nishida, the character designer for the Chamander line, Pikachu, and the Eeveelutions. Vensaur and Gengar are the favorites of Ken Sugimori, another Character Designer. Satoshi Tajiri's favorite Pokemon is Poliwag. Junuchi Masuda's favorite Pokemon is Psyduck, in addition to Psyduck, Sylveon, Exeggcutor-Alola to name a few. Speaking Exeggutor, is Mr. Ishihara's favorite since RB, the first and only TPC president. These are heads of the GF since the days of RB, so its not surprising they want to create that same adventure akin to RB every time. It also points why Charizard snd friends keep getting attention. There favorites of GF, so of course they want them in the game getting super mechanics and represented- they want to relive the glory of RB.

So yeah, I strongly believe that group of Kanto mons not only because they are recognizable, but they are favorites of the original staff, despite the staff having other options for favorite Pokemon.
This is a great point. I had forgotten about polls, but yeah, they show that the Gen 1 Pokémon are not the only popular ones. But I also agree that more reasearch is needed and that the official poll was flawed in structure. I also think you may be onto something when it comes to the fact that it seems that the favorites of the Game Freak staff are the ones getting the more attention. It does not surprise me that it seems to be the case now that we look closer at it. But I guess I would have done the same. If I were in charge, I would totally favorise my favorites and insta-dexit my least favorites.

Slightly unrelated to this entire thread and this discussion, but there is one Gen 1 Pokémon which I wonder about when it comes to popularity. It feels to me that it seems more popular than it is, for the lack of a better phrase. The one I am talking about is Jigglypuff. I only thought of this because of how it has been included in the Smash Bros series since the beginning. Going from the polls, Jigglypuff doesn't seem to be all that popular. It isn't even in the top 30 from Kanto in the official poll, meaning it got less than 9955 votes on the whole. It is notably less popular than Porygon, Dragonair and Magnemite if we go by the poll, which surprises me as those three doesn't seem like very popular Pokémon to me. If we look at the other poll, Jigglypuff is at 82nd place overall, with 162 votes. It made it to the top 100 at least but it stills feels rather low for a Pokémon that "feels" popular. I'm not sure about Jigglypuff really, maybe it is just still living on it's popularity from the Gen 1 days (I know that it had quite a role in the anime, and in Pokémon Adventures, Green (the girl) has one as her main Pokémon). Maybe it is super popular in Japan or something? I don't know.

Now, since the topic of B/W and the Gen 5 Pokémon came up, and I feel like I need to say something about it as well.

First of all, my unpopular opinion is that I liked how B/W had a 100% focus on their new Pokémon during the main game. I consider it to be something positive and not an issue. In comparison to the other first pairs, I think B/W is one of the few ones that actually does a good job at showcasing the new Pokémon. The only others that succeded reasonably well were R/S and R/B (since they had only new Pokémon by default). But the others have issues. Let's take a look.

G/S: Tried as hard as they could to make the Johto Pokémon overshadowed by the Kanto Pokémon in every instance
D/P: Did not even feature all the Sinnoh Pokémon in the regional dex
X/Y: Decent, but the combination of having the lowest amount of new Pokémon to date and the largest regional dex to date meant that the Kalos Pokémon more or less drowned in the masses of old Pokémon
S/M: Did their best to make a vast majority of the new Pokémon as uncommon, rare or elusive as possible
S/S: Did an excellent job at showcasing the new Pokémon early in the game, then they more or less went into the same trap as X/Y once you get to the wild area and beyond. Still decent though

Overall, I'd rank the first pairs like this when it comes to how well they managed to showcase their new Pokémon:
B/W = R/B (by default) > R/S > X/Y = S/S > D/P > S/M > G/S

So I think B/W did way better than most if not all other first pairs when it came to showcasing their new Pokémon.
To make it follow the Unpopular Opinion thread... Personally, Black and White having only Gen 5 Pokémon until post-game had really done more damage than good those games and should be even more criticized for. I know what you're thinking, it's also a popular opinion that fans didn't liked that there's only Gen 5 Pokémon in Black and White until the post-game, but it's much more damaging than you think, and not just sales-wise.
I can't disagree more. Saying that they deserve more criticism for that is ridiculous considering how much they recieved in the past, and still do in the present to an extent. If anything, I think they did not deserve even half of the criticism they have gotten, I think they deserve a lot more praise instead. Also, how in the world is it "much more damaging than you think"? Even if we ignore the sales, I don't see it. If we do include the sales, I don't really see it either. B/W sold 15.64 million copies according to the official site, they are the 6th best-selling DS games overall. While that is less than D/P, the difference is only 2 million copies. And B2/W2 sold more than Platinum, Emerald and Crystal, they sold less than Yellow and US/UM though.
Taking the "Self-Contained" aspect too far. Not having any returning Pokémon at all until the post-game did give a legitimate reason haters give flacks to the first pair of Gen 5 games. Wanting the players to try out the new Pokémon is perfectly fine, if actually good, but doing so by having no Pokémon from previous generations at all can prove alienating. This also make a cause for the three sub-aspects below:
Hardly a legitimate reason to hate them if you ask me. I think dexit is a far more legitimate reason to hate criticise a game for. B/W still allowed you to get all old Pokémon, you just had to beat the game first.
Strained Diversity. Like back in Gen 1, there's not really all that many option with only 156 options (-12 being Legends + Mythical, making 144 options overall), not helping that some were a lot rarer than they should be (like Maractus). Although it did a somewhat better job at Type diversity than previous Generations, some comes off as too similar to previous Generation Pokémon (i.e. there are comparison between the Gothitelle line and the Gardevoir line). Previous Pokémon from previous generations can be transferred, but only in post-game if I recall correctly.

This resulted repeated Pokémon among NPCs, which is forgivable in Gen 1 and 2, but become less and less excusable in later Generations when it comes to the region's new Pokémon.
Before B2/W2 came around, the games generally didn't have very large regional dexes. The only ones that are larger than B/W and were released before them are R/S/E, Platinum and the Johto games. Out of them, I think Platinum is fine. The Hoenn games have serious issues with the water routes but the land routes are fine. The Johto games had the largest pre-B/W dexes, but they have issues with diversity for some types (notably Ghost and Dragon) while they also have more serious issues with the overall Pokémon distribution. R/B/Y, FR/LG and D/P have more serious issues. That said, you could still argue that this is an issue with B/W, but only if you compare them to the games that were released after them. And even so, a large chunk of older games have the same issue as well, so then they deserve to be criticised for it as well.

If anything, I think most other first pairs deserve more criticism for their regional dexes than what B/W do. To me, the most notable are D/P which locks out a large chunk of the new Pokémon to the post-game, as well as G/S and S/M which do a terrible job at showcasing their new Pokémon.
Lack of Cross-Generational Additions. Now, we know that Gen 4 adds a lot of evolution + pre-evolution for Pokémon from previous generations, a few of which are certainly aren't fan favorites, but after make a complete "fresh slate" Gen 5 did, this also means no new evolution or pre-evolution at all. Gen 5 was the Generation that ends up completely dropping the concept of expanding the previous lines, and as much as I don't really think Alomomola should be an evolution of Luvdisc, the similarities is certainly striking and a missed opportunity for many fans.

Now Gen 6 (almost) and Gen 7 repeated that too, but at this point, fans gave up of wanting new cross-generation evolutions until Gen 8, which introduced Regional Evolutions that are generally very well received.
It is no surprise that they more or less dropped the concept of cross-generational new evolutions after the reception they got for them in Gen 4. Did you know that prior to Gen 5, Gen 4 also recieved a lot of criticism for its new Pokémon? Most notably the majority of the new evolutions for old Pokémon, which many fans claimed "ruined" the old Pokémon, and it proved that Game Freak were "running out of ideas". After that, I am not surprised that they dropped them after that. If anything, I am more surprised that they actually did a few more in more recent generations, with Sylveon and the Galarian evolutions.
Overall Bad First Impression to Generation 5 Pokémon. Although every generation have their own suckers, some fans have a tendency to criticize or hate the likes of Garbodor and Vanilluxe to death, which is actually a result of a lack of returning Pokémon. One may say "quantity over quality" but that is difficult to say that's the opposite in Gen 6, 7 and 8 for various reasons, and it's really subjective for those cases. In Gen 5, there are so many new Pokémon that there are bound of some that ends up being too similar to previous Pokémon in the eyes of some fans, not helping that the above mentioned Garbodor and Vanilluxe, as well as the Simi Monkeys and a few other Gen 5 mons with mediocre reception, sticks out like sore thumbs in comparison to even previous generations' "Badmons" at this point.
Other generations have recieved similar criticism, so I don't see your point here. Maybe it was more extreme for Gen 5 than others, but even so, I don't see why we should single out Gen 5. Gen 4 got criticised for other reasons as I stated above and did you know what? Gen 3 got criticised for similar reasons to Gen 5 when it was new, but it seems like everyone has forgotten about that nowadays. I found some old threads on Serebii (from when Gen 3 was the newest) a few years ago where people made similar statements to what the Gen 5 Pokémon got, and it surprised me.
If Gen 6, 7 or 8 repeated that mistake (while including Regional Variants), that might be even worse, as there are fewer options available. Which is definitely ridiculous to think about, since stuff like Mega Evolution or Gigantamax means of course some past Pokémon will return to get either of special treatment, but who knows if the opposite ends up happening; a new Generation with little to no new Pokémon at all.
They couldn't have done the same for Gen 6/7/8 since they have smaller numbers of new Pokémon, meaning their regional dexes would be extremely small compared to previous generations.

If anything, I think the extreme negative fan reception to the new Pokémon in Gen 5 is the reason they never did something like B/W again. Game Freak sometimes listens to their fans. While this might give us good results at some points, that's not always the case. After only focusing on new Pokémon in B/W, it seems obvious that they never wanted to do something like that again because the fans generally didn't like it. A shame for us that did like it though. Afterwards, we have gotten new generations with smaller numbers of new Pokémon that never have the full focus on them, which feels like a step backwards from B/W if you ask me.

Personally, I'd say the only way that B/W and Gen 5 "damaged the franchise" was because of the bad fan-reception they got, which caused Game Freak to completely change their approach to future games. This might be why all games after Gen 5 have been declining in content/features and even gameplay as of late. It may also be why the franchise is currently in such a sad state and why we see garbage like Let's Go, dexit and "free-to-start" Unite (lol) instead of the games and spin-offs with higher quality that we got in the past. I think the fandom in general needs to be less whiny and greedy. We might not agree with everything Game Freak does, but from what I have seen, complaining and whining about everything tends to make things worse in the next generation, not better.

While we're at it, more unpopular opinions from me that is related to this. First of all, I dislike when people talk about some Gen 5 Pokémon as "rip-offs" (or similar terms) of older Pokémon. And this is for several reasons. First of all, why can't there be two Pokémon of the same or a similar concept? Is the Simisear not allowed to exist because Infernape was first? Is the Poliwag line the only frog line allowed to exist, meaning that the Tympole line (and the Froakie line for that matter) are not allowed to exist? Personally, I don't mind there being two or more Pokémon based on the same concept. In fact, I even like it. For instance, if we look at Politoed, Seismitoad and Greninja, they are all Water-type frogs but they are very different in many different ways and I like all three of them.

Second, and this is definitely unpopular. I never really noticed that many of the Gen 5 Pokémon resembled older Pokémon when I first played B/W. If people hadn't whined so much about it on Pokémon sites, I would probably never have noticed it either. All of the Gen 5 Pokémon always felt completely new to me. And if we do look at them in comparison to older Pokémon, I personally much rather prefer to see them as homages and not "rip-offs", because homages are what they really are. And if we compare the Gen 5 Pokémon to similar older Pokémon, I prefer the Gen 5 Pokémon over the older ones in a vast majority of the cases.

Third, if we now are going to look at Pokémon as "rip-offs" of older Pokémon, why just focus on Gen 5? All other generations except maybe Gen 2 have plenty of examples that can be seem as "rip-offs" of older Pokémon as well. Some examples below.
Gen 3 had the Poochyena line which can be seen as similar to the Houndour line, the Wurmple line which is similar to the Caterpie and Weedle lines, and the Feebas line which is similar to the Magikarp line.
Gen 4 had the Glameow line which is similar to the Meowth line and the Shinx line which is similar to the Electrike line.
Gen 6 had the Fennekin and Froakie lines which are similar to the Vulpix and Poliwag/Tympole lines, and the Bunnelby line which is similar to the Buneary line.
Gen 7 had Passimian which is similar to the Mankey line, and the Bounsweet line which is similar to the Petilil line.
Gen 8 had Wooloo which is similar to Mareep, the Grookey line which is similar to the Pansage line, and the Nickit line which is similar to the Zorua line.
And there's many others too, I just listed some simple examples here. My unpopular opinions here is that Gen 5 gets too much criticism for this while all other generations basically go uncriticized for this. I also dislike only seeing new Pokémon as similar to old ones, I prefer to see all new Pokémon as their own instead of just references/homages/"rip-offs" to old ones.

Lastly, what was more said about B/W? Late evolution levels and how some Pokémon are only available during the post-game. The really late evolution levels are not that much of an issue, I think there's only a handful of Pokémon that are downright impossible to evolve before the E4. That said, I am a person who tends to grind a lot so I am probably not the best person to ask here. I think my teams in B/W were at level 50 or above when I first beat the games. That said, I do agree that they handled Zoroark poorly, it shouldn't have been event-only.

But even so, B/W aren't the only games with this issue. Good luck getting several Johto Pokémon before beating the game in the Johto games, like Larvitar or Sneasel. Many new Pokémon in D/P suffers from the same issue, then you couldn't get the Beldum line before beating the game in R/S, and I think the Dreepy line in S/S too? Not sure about it though. So again, why complain about B/W when other games have the same issue?

Lastly, I also love the graphics and color palette of Gen 5. Thanks to Magcargo for mentioning it! I have never really thought about it being "darker" than Gen 4 before, but now that you say it, I agree. And I like it. This helped the games feel more mature than Gen 4 which felt immature in many instances for me (especially HG/SS). I think this goes very well with the themes of the games being more serious and mature than previous generations. Another unpopular opinion is that I really like the sprites of Gen 5, I think they are really good and them being pixilated never bothered me at all.

This was once again another great opportunity for me to say some things I have wanted to say for a while. So thanks! If there are any responses to this, I'll answer back tomorrow.
 
I disagree about the side-games making the main games better on their own, but I do agree with you that the older generations did side-games with connections to the main games better than the newer generations. As said, I never owned the Stadium games but I did play Colosseum and XD for Gen 3 and PBR for Gen 4, those games were a ton of fun! I kinda miss these types of games for the newer generations, it seems like the concept was more or less dropped after Gen 4. Might have been because PBR got a rather negative reception in general (I liked it though).

And the printer too! That's another unique thing for Gen 1 and 2. And another thing I never got to try out since I never owned a Game Boy printer, but it seemed really cool.

Thanks for the suggestion! I'm going to check it out because I am really interested in how skill plays a part in the Gen 1 metagame.

This is a great point. I had forgotten about polls, but yeah, they show that the Gen 1 Pokémon are not the only popular ones. But I also agree that more reasearch is needed and that the official poll was flawed in structure. I also think you may be onto something when it comes to the fact that it seems that the favorites of the Game Freak staff are the ones getting the more attention. It does not surprise me that it seems to be the case now that we look closer at it. But I guess I would have done the same. If I were in charge, I would totally favorise my favorites and insta-dexit my least favorites.

Slightly unrelated to this entire thread and this discussion, but there is one Gen 1 Pokémon which I wonder about when it comes to popularity. It feels to me that it seems more popular than it is, for the lack of a better phrase. The one I am talking about is Jigglypuff. I only thought of this because of how it has been included in the Smash Bros series since the beginning. Going from the polls, Jigglypuff doesn't seem to be all that popular. It isn't even in the top 30 from Kanto in the official poll, meaning it got less than 9955 votes on the whole. It is notably less popular than Porygon, Dragonair and Magnemite if we go by the poll, which surprises me as those three doesn't seem like very popular Pokémon to me. If we look at the other poll, Jigglypuff is at 82nd place overall, with 162 votes. It made it to the top 100 at least but it stills feels rather low for a Pokémon that "feels" popular. I'm not sure about Jigglypuff really, maybe it is just still living on it's popularity from the Gen 1 days (I know that it had quite a role in the anime, and in Pokémon Adventures, Green (the girl) has one as her main Pokémon). Maybe it is super popular in Japan or something? I don't know.

Now, since the topic of B/W and the Gen 5 Pokémon came up, and I feel like I need to say something about it as well.

First of all, my unpopular opinion is that I liked how B/W had a 100% focus on their new Pokémon during the main game. I consider it to be something positive and not an issue. In comparison to the other first pairs, I think B/W is one of the few ones that actually does a good job at showcasing the new Pokémon. The only others that succeded reasonably well were R/S and R/B (since they had only new Pokémon by default). But the others have issues. Let's take a look.

G/S: Tried as hard as they could to make the Johto Pokémon overshadowed by the Kanto Pokémon in every instance
D/P: Did not even feature all the Sinnoh Pokémon in the regional dex
X/Y: Decent, but the combination of having the lowest amount of new Pokémon to date and the largest regional dex to date meant that the Kalos Pokémon more or less drowned in the masses of old Pokémon
S/M: Did their best to make a vast majority of the new Pokémon as uncommon, rare or elusive as possible
S/S: Did an excellent job at showcasing the new Pokémon early in the game, then they more or less went into the same trap as X/Y once you get to the wild area and beyond. Still decent though

Overall, I'd rank the first pairs like this when it comes to how well they managed to showcase their new Pokémon:
B/W = R/B (by default) > R/S > X/Y = S/S > D/P > S/M > G/S

So I think B/W did way better than most if not all other first pairs when it came to showcasing their new Pokémon.

I can't disagree more. Saying that they deserve more criticism for that is ridiculous considering how much they recieved in the past, and still do in the present to an extent. If anything, I think they did not deserve even half of the criticism they have gotten, I think they deserve a lot more praise instead. Also, how in the world is it "much more damaging than you think"? Even if we ignore the sales, I don't see it. If we do include the sales, I don't really see it either. B/W sold 15.64 million copies according to the official site, they are the 6th best-selling DS games overall. While that is less than D/P, the difference is only 2 million copies. And B2/W2 sold more than Platinum, Emerald and Crystal, they sold less than Yellow and US/UM though.

Hardly a legitimate reason to hate them if you ask me. I think dexit is a far more legitimate reason to hate criticise a game for. B/W still allowed you to get all old Pokémon, you just had to beat the game first.

Before B2/W2 came around, the games generally didn't have very large regional dexes. The only ones that are larger than B/W and were released before them are R/S/E, Platinum and the Johto games. Out of them, I think Platinum is fine. The Hoenn games have serious issues with the water routes but the land routes are fine. The Johto games had the largest pre-B/W dexes, but they have issues with diversity for some types (notably Ghost and Dragon) while they also have more serious issues with the overall Pokémon distribution. R/B/Y, FR/LG and D/P have more serious issues. That said, you could still argue that this is an issue with B/W, but only if you compare them to the games that were released after them. And even so, a large chunk of older games have the same issue as well, so then they deserve to be criticised for it as well.

If anything, I think most other first pairs deserve more criticism for their regional dexes than what B/W do. To me, the most notable are D/P which locks out a large chunk of the new Pokémon to the post-game, as well as G/S and S/M which do a terrible job at showcasing their new Pokémon.

It is no surprise that they more or less dropped the concept of cross-generational new evolutions after the reception they got for them in Gen 4. Did you know that prior to Gen 5, Gen 4 also recieved a lot of criticism for its new Pokémon? Most notably the majority of the new evolutions for old Pokémon, which many fans claimed "ruined" the old Pokémon, and it proved that Game Freak were "running out of ideas". After that, I am not surprised that they dropped them after that. If anything, I am more surprised that they actually did a few more in more recent generations, with Sylveon and the Galarian evolutions.

Other generations have recieved similar criticism, so I don't see your point here. Maybe it was more extreme for Gen 5 than others, but even so, I don't see why we should single out Gen 5. Gen 4 got criticised for other reasons as I stated above and did you know what? Gen 3 got criticised for similar reasons to Gen 5 when it was new, but it seems like everyone has forgotten about that nowadays. I found some old threads on Serebii (from when Gen 3 was the newest) a few years ago where people made similar statements to what the Gen 5 Pokémon got, and it surprised me.

They couldn't have done the same for Gen 6/7/8 since they have smaller numbers of new Pokémon, meaning their regional dexes would be extremely small compared to previous generations.

If anything, I think the extreme negative fan reception to the new Pokémon in Gen 5 is the reason they never did something like B/W again. Game Freak sometimes listens to their fans. While this might give us good results at some points, that's not always the case. After only focusing on new Pokémon in B/W, it seems obvious that they never wanted to do something like that again because the fans generally didn't like it. A shame for us that did like it though. Afterwards, we have gotten new generations with smaller numbers of new Pokémon that never have the full focus on them, which feels like a step backwards from B/W if you ask me.

Personally, I'd say the only way that B/W and Gen 5 "damaged the franchise" was because of the bad fan-reception they got, which caused Game Freak to completely change their approach to future games. This might be why all games after Gen 5 have been declining in content/features and even gameplay as of late. It may also be why the franchise is currently in such a sad state and why we see garbage like Let's Go, dexit and "free-to-start" Unite (lol) instead of the games and spin-offs with higher quality that we got in the past. I think the fandom in general needs to be less whiny and greedy. We might not agree with everything Game Freak does, but from what I have seen, complaining and whining about everything tends to make things worse in the next generation, not better.

While we're at it, more unpopular opinions from me that is related to this. First of all, I dislike when people talk about some Gen 5 Pokémon as "rip-offs" (or similar terms) of older Pokémon. And this is for several reasons. First of all, why can't there be two Pokémon of the same or a similar concept? Is the Simisear not allowed to exist because Infernape was first? Is the Poliwag line the only frog line allowed to exist, meaning that the Tympole line (and the Froakie line for that matter) are not allowed to exist? Personally, I don't mind there being two or more Pokémon based on the same concept. In fact, I even like it. For instance, if we look at Politoed, Seismitoad and Greninja, they are all Water-type frogs but they are very different in many different ways and I like all three of them.

Second, and this is definitely unpopular. I never really noticed that many of the Gen 5 Pokémon resembled older Pokémon when I first played B/W. If people hadn't whined so much about it on Pokémon sites, I would probably never have noticed it either. All of the Gen 5 Pokémon always felt completely new to me. And if we do look at them in comparison to older Pokémon, I personally much rather prefer to see them as homages and not "rip-offs", because homages are what they really are. And if we compare the Gen 5 Pokémon to similar older Pokémon, I prefer the Gen 5 Pokémon over the older ones in a vast majority of the cases.

Third, if we now are going to look at Pokémon as "rip-offs" of older Pokémon, why just focus on Gen 5? All other generations except maybe Gen 2 have plenty of examples that can be seem as "rip-offs" of older Pokémon as well. Some examples below.
Gen 3 had the Poochyena line which can be seen as similar to the Houndour line, the Wurmple line which is similar to the Caterpie and Weedle lines, and the Feebas line which is similar to the Magikarp line.
Gen 4 had the Glameow line which is similar to the Meowth line and the Shinx line which is similar to the Electrike line.
Gen 6 had the Fennekin and Froakie lines which are similar to the Vulpix and Poliwag/Tympole lines, and the Bunnelby line which is similar to the Buneary line.
Gen 7 had Passimian which is similar to the Mankey line, and the Bounsweet line which is similar to the Petilil line.
Gen 8 had Wooloo which is similar to Mareep, the Grookey line which is similar to the Pansage line, and the Nickit line which is similar to the Zorua line.
And there's many others too, I just listed some simple examples here. My unpopular opinions here is that Gen 5 gets too much criticism for this while all otheThr generations basically go uncriticized for this. I also dislike only seeing new Pokémon as similar to old ones, I prefer to see all new Pokémon as their own instead of just references/homages/"rip-offs" to old ones.

Lastly, what was more said about B/W? Late evolution levels and how some Pokémon are only available during the post-game. The really late evolution levels are not that much of an issue, I think there's only a handful of Pokémon that are downright impossible to evolve before the E4. That said, I am a person who tends to grind a lot so I am probably not the best person to ask here. I think my teams in B/W were at level 50 or above when I first beat the games. That said, I do agree that they handled Zoroark poorly, it shouldn't have been event-only.

But even so, B/W aren't the only games with this issue. Good luck getting several Johto Pokémon before beating the game in the Johto games, like Larvitar or Sneasel. Many new Pokémon in D/P suffers from the same issue, then you couldn't get the Beldum line before beating the game in R/S, and I think the Dreepy line in S/S too? Not sure about it though. So again, why complain about B/W when other games have the same issue?

Lastly, I also love the graphics and color palette of Gen 5. Thanks to Magcargo for mentioning it! I have never really thought about it being "darker" than Gen 4 before, but now that you say it, I agree. And I like it. This helped the games feel more mature than Gen 4 which felt immature in many instances for me (especially HG/SS). I think this goes very well with the themes of the games being more serious and mature than previous generations. Another unpopular opinion is that I really like the sprites of Gen 5, I think they are really good and them being pixilated never bothered me at all.

This was once again another great opportunity for me to say some things I have wanted to say for a while. So thanks! If there are any responses to this, I'll answer back tomorrow.
But the way fan complained massively about Dexit and even HOME for more than a year, it will definitely going to cause GF to ignore them even further if they proved ungrateful in the long run. I do not agree with the direction GF is going, but I definitely know that they are taking advantage of nostalgia as much as possible, even if they over did it with Gen 1 as we know it.

If you want a proper unpopular opinion, here goes nothing: Regardless of how do you think of Leon fondly or not, Charizard being Leon's Ace is just a bad story design. Not just because of the usual "Kanto pandering" reason, but because it was done in a way that not only it isn't even a Pokémon of Galar you could even catch, but the fact that the story makes it so Leon have always Charizard, not any of the other two Kanto starter depending on your starter.

Nothing tells where Leon even get his Charizard from in the game perspective - I don't know if the anime at least elaborated so I only said game perspective because of that - or if he even hails from Kanto where the three Kanto starters can be legitimately obtains where he goes on a similar journey to Red. Rules of convention to details tells he might, sure, but there's no concrete proof other than having Charizard as his Ace to clarify any of that.

Now Leon is definitely no pushover, he's the champion of Galar after all. But if you happens to choose Grookey, Leon ends up having two Fire-types that do not really cover each others' weaknesses except Charizard's Solar Beam (where it cannot summon sun because of it's Gigantamax form), as Cinderace only have Pyro Ball, Acrobatics, Feint and Quick Attack, the latter two bring priorty Normal-type attacks, and none of these moves allows it to hit super effectively against what could threaten Charizard. This is not a probelm if the player chooses Sobble (Leon uses Rillaboom in this case) or Scorbunny (Leon uses Intelleon), but still, this needs to be pointed out.

If Leon's Ace actually depends on what starter you choose (for example, Leon's Ace will be Blastoise so your Rillaboom would be useful but still had to watch for Cinderace, or inversely a Venusaur to match your starter's primary type), with the other two Kanto starters having their Gigantamax forms available earlier than Isle of Armor, then it wouldn't be as bad as him being completely locked into Charizard at the expense of the other two Kanto starters. Still "Kanto pandering", but nowhere as a severe favoritism.

The anime and Spin-off can all keep Leon his Charizard, but the game itself should at least not restrict to one previous starter and the Kanto starter in question should depends on what your Galar starter is as well, with the story not letting Leon showing his Ace before the point you get either Grookey, Scorbunny or Sobble. This at least give a layer of surprise that the player would not expect, Kanto or otherwise.
 
If you want a proper unpopular opinion, here goes nothing: Regardless of how do you think of Leon fondly or not, Charizard being Leon's Ace is just a bad story design.
its bad game design but story wise it makes sense
leon is a showman and charizard is a "cool", popular mon
because zard is popular leon could've imported it to look cool
Now Leon is definitely no pushover, he's the champion of Galar after all. But if you happens to choose Grookey, Leon ends up having two Fire-types that do not really cover each others' weaknesses except Charizard's Solar Beam (where it cannot summon sun because of it's Gigantamax form), as Cinderace only have Pyro Ball, Acrobatics, Feint and Quick Attack, the latter two bring priorty Normal-type attacks, and none of these moves allows it to hit super effectively against what could threaten Charizard. This is not a probelm if the player chooses Sobble (Leon uses Rillaboom in this case) or Scorbunny (Leon uses Intelleon), but still, this needs to be pointed out.
i think this wouldve been better if Cinderace had a better movepool (namely hjk or just jk)
though because its 2 fire types vs what is your traditionally higher leveled "ace" starter, you should have an easier time
If Leon's Ace actually depends on what starter you choose (for example, Leon's Ace will be Blastoise so your Rillaboom would be useful but still had to watch for Cinderace, or inversely a Venusaur to match your starter's primary type), with the other two Kanto starters having their Gigantamax forms available earlier than Isle of Armor, then it wouldn't be as bad as him being completely locked into Charizard at the expense of the other two Kanto starters. Still "Kanto pandering", but nowhere as a severe favoritism.
The anime and Spin-off can all keep Leon his Charizard, but the game itself should at least not restrict to one previous starter and the Kanto starter in question should depends on what your Galar starter is as well, with the story not letting Leon showing his Ace before the point you get either Grookey, Scorbunny or Sobble. This at least give a layer of surprise that the player would not expect, Kanto or otherwise.
storywise he should def be using zard, but if the other 2 mons were secretly in rotation that would be a surprise. the nongames and trailers would've spoiled the fact he used zard so we'd expect at least one starter
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top