Don't encourage them.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
I've got a big one here.
Some of Uri Geller's claims about Kadabra actually warrant discussion on whether he was completely wrong about suing over its design. Of course, his lawsuit led to a solid Pokemon being ignored in the anime and TCG (Abra hasn't appeared since Diamond and Pearl!), and his claims about it being "evil and occult" aren't really... true? But the other claims he made are completely valid.
Now, sorry about that rant, but I thought it deserved to be said.
Some of Uri Geller's claims about Kadabra actually warrant discussion on whether he was completely wrong about suing over its design. Of course, his lawsuit led to a solid Pokemon being ignored in the anime and TCG (Abra hasn't appeared since Diamond and Pearl!), and his claims about it being "evil and occult" aren't really... true? But the other claims he made are completely valid.
The man isn't perfect, and his litigations are often frivolous, but his problems with the design in tandem with his name being attached to it makes the whole thing very evident. Uri Geller is Israeli-British, and is also Jewish. If you look at the patterns on Kadabra's stomach, it's not that hard to see how putting that kind of symbol on a Pokemon named after someone of Jewish heritage was a GROSS lack of researching on GF's part. For those of you who don't know, that symbol heavily resembles the one used by the Nazi secret police, the SS. And if you don't understand the reasoning why that may be problematic, I highly suggest closing this RIGHT NOW and doing your research on the topic.
It's not a stretch to assume that these symbols, while not intentional, were a design choice that was ignorant at BEST and Game Freak should have changed the design or the name as soon as they understood the inherent problems in its design. If they hadn't named it after Geller, this wouldn't have been a problem. It's been in the design for decades at this point, and I doubt it's going to change, but too often we put him alongside the other "Pokemon is evil and demonic" bits and forget the legitimate reasonings behind some of the lawsuit.
Just to clear things up.
Things I AM NOT SAYING:
Things I AM SAYING:
It's not a stretch to assume that these symbols, while not intentional, were a design choice that was ignorant at BEST and Game Freak should have changed the design or the name as soon as they understood the inherent problems in its design. If they hadn't named it after Geller, this wouldn't have been a problem. It's been in the design for decades at this point, and I doubt it's going to change, but too often we put him alongside the other "Pokemon is evil and demonic" bits and forget the legitimate reasonings behind some of the lawsuit.
Just to clear things up.
Things I AM NOT SAYING:
- Uri Geller was completely in the right in every bit in his lawsuit.
- His other lawsuits haven't been frivolous at other times
- Kadabra is an antisemitic design
- Game Freak needs to change the design THIS SECOND.
Things I AM SAYING:
- It's not a stretch to see it as at the least, problematic
- Geller's interpretation was very much reasonable for someone whose parents were of Austrian-Jewish and Hungarian-Jewish descent born in the aftermath of WWII.
- Similar to Jynx, it's an instance of Game Freak making design decisions without an international audience in mind.
Now, sorry about that rant, but I thought it deserved to be said.
Remember Gen V and VI where Sheer Force Tauros was forced to run Rock Climb, which it could only get with that ability via Dream World?
Body Slam wasn't compatible with its hidden ability until Gen VII when they released the Virtual Console versions of the Gen I games.
Hard disagree. I can see where you're coming from, but the zigzag as a symbol is usually used to denote balance between soul and matter, especially when next to parallel zigzags. Since they start and end in the same place but delineate in the middle, and do so in the same pattern as the parallel zigzags meaning they also don't touch, it represents harmony of the material and immaterial working together despite not directly effecting each other.
This is true in many native mythologies, in particular American and Austronesian. It is not true in Japan traditionally, but has started seeing some use in this context there more recently.
All this is to say that those symbols mean something completely different and fits the posterchild of the Psychic-Type well. Saying it represents the SS makes as much sense as saying the star on Kadabra's forehead represents the Star of David thanks to Uri Geller's Jewish heritage. It's a pretty big reach.
And that's beside the point anyway because if Pokémon had put a "fair use for parody" disclaimer in its game or manual somewhere then the lawsuit wouldn't have worked. Them being punished for not doing that is insanely dumb and exposes the badly designed copywrite law that we have more than anything else.
Also Jynx wasn't "designed without an international audience in mind". A) They have black people in Japan and B) It was dumb that Jynx's design got changed as it was based on a mythological creature where the black skin makes absolute sense. Perhaps it didn't read well to people in the west, but that's due to our ignorance of the source material rather than Game Freak.
Really? What mythical creature is Jynx based off of? I’ve heard some people claim Jynx is based off a Norwegian Princess or the trend of Japanese Girls tanning to the extreme?
Actually, the timeline is more like this:
-Kadabra hasn't been in the TCG since e-Skyridge, the very last Gen II set that was released in the west. All Abra cards since have the ability to auto-evolve into Alakazam
-Kadabra has not appeared in the anime since Advanced Generation. The exception is a crowdshot in the Kyurem movie that had all of the Gen I-V Pokemon(minus Genesect), including the sole appearances of Porygon 2 and Porygon Z
-Since Diamond and Pearl, Everstone is flagged to negate its effect on Kadabra(the recent DP beta leaks shows this was 100% intentional), so it will always evolve when traded within the main series.
The Yama-uba. This is where its Ice-Type comes from, as the Yama-uba lives high on mountains and has control over snow. This yokai is also the basis of ganguro fashion (bleaching hair and tanning to the extreme) -- in slang, people who are seen as taking ganguro too far are called "Yamanba". This is due to the Yama-uba being described as having dark skin and whitish-blonde hair. It also helps that it's usually depicted in a red kimono, like Jynx.
... Hmm, at best I would say upon seeing the the three waves he could have confused them for the Nazi SS symbol and gotten offended a Pokemon named after him has them.
... BUT despite probably being explained that they're not that symbol but the 3 waves of the Zener Cards (something you'd think a proclaimed Psychic would know about...), he STILL tried to sue Pokemon for millions. This alone shows this has nothing to do with Kadabra's design. I wouldn't be surprised if GF offered to change the design to remove/change the symbol as they changed Jynx's skin tone (and maybe thye offered to also change the name). But no, Uri Geller heard a Pokemon was named after him that bent spoons (which Uri Geller made famouse) and saw an opportunity to sue for them using his name, plain and simple, do not give this man any benefit of the doubt. No offer that wasn't millions of dollars wasn't accepted thus why Kadabra's design and Japanese name wasn't changed (because why wouldn't they change it unless it wouldn't affect anything?).
The only fault I would give GF was using living people's names for Pokemon.
If you want to throw Geller a bone (which we shouldn't), the Abra family is occultish because, well, that's what psychic powers has been connected to. Abra family resemble goats, has strange symbols on them, and use Psychic powers (aka powers not given to them by God according to Christians); thus occult. But GF didn't do this out of spite toward Uri Geller, the entire Abra family was probably designed and then GF thought it would be cute to name them after a batch of psychics. A misunderstanding that if Uri Geller truly felt insulted by they likely would have changed the name/design cause this was still the early days.
Also I don't think an international consultant would have caught this, or at least would suggest not naming it after a living person. Remember one thing Uri Geller pointed out was a connection to him was the spoon bending so I'm curious even if they didn't name it after him he would still have tried suing.
What does that have anything to do with Rock Climb being a subpar Normal move?
Looking at Tauros moves, while it may not have a Normal-type that took advantage of Sheer Force, it did have some other notable options: Zen Headbutt, Rock Slide, & Iron Head.
It wouldn't hurt to read the post before you respond to it, would it?
No one is suggesting that it was on purpose or that there was no other, benign intention behind the design choice. The fact remains that it unintentionally resembles a symbol that Geller had every reason to find offensive.
I can't believe that people are responding with "well, Geller was overreacting/a bad person/whatever, so it doesn't count." That's not even remotely NaturalTropius's point, and no one is trying to "throw Geller a bone" by pointing this out, no one is saying that Game Freak made it resemble the symbol on purpose, and no one is saying that Kadabra's design is nonsensical and asking you to defend it.
There are still better ways to get across the idea of "occult" and "balance between soul and matter" anyway - see every other Psychic-type Pokémon ever.
Personally, I've always found just slapping on a culturally-specific symbol that doesn't communicate anything to people without that cultural context to be a weak and superficial way to express a design's concept anyway (Kadabra doesn't even integrate it cleverly? it's just a single-meaning symbol thrown in to fill space?), and the idea that Kadabra relies on people to recognize an obscure occult symbol for its design to communicate its intentions - let alone to show that it isn't the obviously-offensive other symbol it appears to be that has a completely different implication in context - just makes it seem that much lazier and that much more thoughtless. It's not like Kadabra is a better design for having the symbol even with its intended meaning, is it?
Yuri Geller obviously handled the situation poorly and it's not like anyone thinks he deserved to win the lawsuit or is trying to prove that he's a perfectly respectable individual who had a perfectly proportionate response to this (he's not and he didn't), but I have no idea why you guys are dismissing this the way you are. It's definitely a valid point, and it's something that absolutely could have been avoided in a completely harmless way without hurting Kadabra's design at all - even if Geller's reaction was entirely disproportionate and very badly handled for his own part, the fact that Game Freak got into this situation in the first place is on them.
(Especially when they're going to do something utterly stupid like naming a fictional creature after a real person without even getting his consent. What were they thinking?)
Personally, I'm just glad we haven't had any more Pokémon like Kadabra since the first Generation. Game Freak has learned their lesson and now actually does do the kind of research and exercise the kind of caution they should have done here, and that's all anyone can really ask.
Thanks for elaborating there! Didn't actually know the full timeline. Should've looked that up and made sure my facts were a little straighter on the TCG bit.
... Then what was the point of bringing this up?
That Kadabra could have been better design? Well that could be said for many Pokemon. Infact, the original Kadabra sprite from Red & Green didn't have a star or waves, those were added later:
Probably was decided that Kadabra looked pretty plain so they wanted to "spice up" the design. The whole concept of the Abra family is that they were just "psychic monster", so they looked up psychic symbols and found the Zener cards. A star on the forehead, little wavy lines on the abdomen, there, now it looks visually more interesting. It would be no different had they put an eye instead of a star and outline of the Marsh Badge instead of wavy lines (actually thinking about it that might have been better, going with the third eye concept at least).
I also am very weary when someone suggests a change to anything just because "someone might be offended". That's a VERY dangerous mindset to get into because, unless it's VERY obvious why its offensive behind personal feelings, anything could be twisted to being offensive to someone due to personal experiences. And a lot of time people try to justify their offense by paralleling it with something obviously offensive, such as saying any wavy lines look like the Nazi SS symbol. Jynx was a special case and Japan has had a history of depicting black characters with pitch black skin and giant lips. Jynx likely had some stereotypes in it, be it a racist depiction of dark-skinned people or an obscure Japanese fashion trend, and GF realized it was probably better to give Jynx some more fictional traits (making its "skin" purple) than leaving it as a possible relic.
But Kadabra? BTW, I'm Jewish and I took no offense from Kadabra. Infact I think if you ask 99.99~% of Jewish people and they wouldn't immediately think that (mainly cause there's also three wavy lines instead of two)! I think Uri Geller is the only Jewish person who takes offense from Kadabra because it uses his name (and is shown bending spoons) and he wants to be paid.
I can agree with this. This was a valuable lesson not to name anything after a living person and maybe try to find other ways to depict certain ideas that would hopefully not be cultural offensive.
I was just stating the only time Rock Climb has, and probably ever will, see anything resembling usage outside of a way to overcome obstacles in Gen IV's overworld. I wasn't saying it was good move, I was just pointing out that Tauros was forced to use it because it was its best STAB option after the Sheer Force boost, looking at all of its Gen V and VI sets.
Being able to use both Body Slam and Sheer Force together in Gen VII pretty much made it obsolete. 6-7 less base power after Sheer Force for 15% more accuracy made Body Slam the superior option after that.
Anyways, to be more on-topic, as an unpopular opinion I enjoyed Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee for what it was. While I know doing so made the easy game even easier, doing couch co-op with my Fiancee was really fun, when I made a save file for her on my Switch.
I strongly disagree with your last point. I have no problem with the ease of obtaining the TRs themselves - in fact, it's absolutely necessary. In past generations, one of the biggest barriers to competitive and facility play was the difficulty in obtaining single-use TMs, many of which had extreme BP costs or were outright one per game. Making TRs easily renewable through Max Raids and similar makes them feel valuable without imposing artificial scarcity on people who need certain moves for a competitive team.
My issue is, again, that the way the TR system was implemented gives many Pokemon ridiculously wide movepools which give them coverage options for every conceivable threat and/or a vast array of support moves, making it impossible to safely predict what set a Pokemon might be running.
Sword and Shield, despite their many competitive quality of life improvements, are low effort terrible cash grab games. At least 90% of the expansion appeal is literally just cut content being sold back to us. The single player experience is comically barren and easy while the multiplayer is so strong armed into 3v3 or 4v4 doubles that I actually regret paying for home to transfer (some) of my prior Pokemon. Fuck you Gamefreak, let me click "find battle" for 6v6 single for ONCE.
8th gen may technically be better than the first couple gens but overall it is THE worst Pokemon game when scaled for technology. Gamefreak should be ashamed and hopefully 9th gen will right some of the wrongs.
8th gen may technically be better than the first couple gens but overall it is THE worst Pokemon game when scaled for technology. Gamefreak should be ashamed and hopefully 9th gen will right some of the wrongs.
I have to agree tbh. It puts a bad taste in my mouth for this content that was cut to be sold back to us as "DLC". I really don't appreciate it being not included, being marked as "worth continuing in other games" when they remove pokemon, and then suddenly add back as DLC? Nah fam, come on Gamefreak. I'm a diehard Pokemon fan, and this really pissed me off. I haven't bought any of the DLC this gen, I just can't get myself to do it.
Plague von Karma
Banned deucer.
The first generation of Pokemon is extremely overhated these days, and I don't know why the trend began. I'm assuming it's because of a lot of the older fans clashing with newer ones around 2009-2012, especially just after BW's release. Around that time, a lot of fans were facing a bit of shock with the art style shift, and there was a lot of clashing between different "factions", so to speak. From a historical perspective though, the way the stigma stuck feels weird. It seems to be a case of people failing to separate the person from the game, leading to a lot of confirmation bias as new discoveries are made. It's kind of become standard to despise the original generation where so much history came from. Even on the competitive level, Gen 1 has this really weird stigma for being a "luck-fest" or "skill-less" when it's so, so much deeper than that. While teambuilding isn't that difficult, actually being good at the game has a steep learning curve.
Outside of the game though, Gen 1 has one of the most intricate histories of any selection of games that I have ever seen. Like, every piece of media has a formidable amount of history to it. Did you know there was a Radio Drama released in 1998 where Giovanni and Jessie's parents were talked about, which has never really been revisited since? This is just one of many pieces of obscure media that I just adore looking into, it's hard to find this kind of content in any other generation.
Here are some of my favourite factoids:
On a side note, in Pokemon Stadium 2, Earl would talk about that mechanic I was on about earlier. It was never a glitch, it was in fact intentional!
Outside of the game though, Gen 1 has one of the most intricate histories of any selection of games that I have ever seen. Like, every piece of media has a formidable amount of history to it. Did you know there was a Radio Drama released in 1998 where Giovanni and Jessie's parents were talked about, which has never really been revisited since? This is just one of many pieces of obscure media that I just adore looking into, it's hard to find this kind of content in any other generation.
Here are some of my favourite factoids:
- The competitive scene would receive televised coverage on TV, in this case on Nintendo's 64 Mario Stadium in Japan, where Nintendo Cup 97 matches would be aired. This went on until the demise of the show in 1999. Yes, the game was competitive even at that time!
- It has battle mechanics that are still discovered to this day! For example, there was a mechanic where if your Pokemon had the same type as a move being used on it, you were immune to most secondary effects. For example, Blizzard can't freeze Ice-types!
- The playground myths such as Pikablu, White Hand, etc are still super fun to read up on, especially in how they came about.
On a side note, in Pokemon Stadium 2, Earl would talk about that mechanic I was on about earlier. It was never a glitch, it was in fact intentional!
No, they add them back in a free update that coincides with the release of a DLC. It's pretty much identical to when an old Pokemon is added in an enhanced version (for example, Volcarona in USUM). You may need to buy the DLC / enhanced version to catch a new one for yourself, but nothing is stopping your friend from trading you one, or you from transfering up an old Volcarona from a previous game. The only difference is that you didn't have to wait for USUM to get a secondhand Volcarona.
You're specifically talking about what I am, though. If you look at this game as it's OWN TITLE, do you really think GameFreak thought: "Yeah, if they don't buy the DLC, they can just trade their friends or transfer"? Now you're not wrong, I didn't really think about the other games in regards to this specific example, but I'm not loving this DLC extravaganza they have planned. You can't say they added them back in a "free update" if you can't actually get them yourself. It's more of a "look what you could be getting if you buy the DLC" imo.
Yeah, because in all games you could definitely catch your own of all pokemon.
Sorry but there might be plenty of reasons to not like the dlc system, but the "catch your own" part is identical to previous titles. You always needed to transfer to complete the "nat dex", no game ever had all pokes available on its own
The only "difference" is that for swsh you have to wait for the actual free patch to do so.
Hmm, you're not wrong now that I think about it this way. Call me a genwunner but I guess I'm just getting tired of this formula? I don't know honestly. Something about this game just didn't feel right to me. I guess I just expected more for what we paid for it. Maybe I would have been happier if we committed harder to the Wild Area/Open World feel. But good point.
Similarly, the main writer for Gen 1s anime made a novel explaining more about the characters, though it's poorly documented. It confirms Ash shouldn't be 10 after just 6 episodes, why Gary has a car and followers, Brock's rooted romance, and the tragic rules of being a Gym leader
Also not many are aware Red's real name is Satoshi instead of a color, though similar to Ash no longer being 10, it's been re-connect by modern GF
So where's the unpopular opinion?
While those outside of the Pokemon community may say Pokemon fans are being selfish/had been spoiled and acting like we're self entitled, but that doesn't change that for 20+ years we've been told that all Pokemon, no matter how popular they are, are at the very least were not neglected inclusion in the past because any Pokemon can be someone's favorite Pokemon. GF really pushed forming a strong connection with the Pokemon you catch and take a liking to and until Gen VIII they've kept that promise by having all Pokemon in the games even if you had to transfer it through other means. And then, just like that, treated with little fanfare or reassurance they had thought heavily on it, Dexit. Your favorite Pokemon possibly wasn't in the game anymore, even if you tried transferring it. That Pokemon was now either stuck in past gen's game or in HOME limbo.
Gen VIII's "Dexit" was handled poorly. With the sudden off-hand announcement in a post-show E3 segment (only confounded further with a Japanese only magazine interview also revealing Mega Evos and Z-Moves were also gone), GF taking weeks to respond as they hoped this would just blow over when it became obvious it wouldn't, them coming up with rather poor excuses when what they showed didn't support said excuses, fans coming up with better excuses only to reveal those ideas which would have justified the cut didn't happen, and of course when the games came out people seeing the models were EXACTLY the same (maybe with some different shading but come now) and we only get the likely reason for the cut was either GF's poor programming methods meant they couldn't include all the Pokemon due to having to make multiple models for Dynamax Pokemon & could later advertise the Pokemon back via DLC (WHICH GF said they wouldn't do because they were so desperate to keep that as a surprise for the DLC they blatantly lied).
Oh, and of course do I even need to mention to transfer a Pokemon up you need to pay both a Bank and HOME Premium fee? A process which used to be free now charging nearly 10 bucks to have limited access to.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
And while we’re at it, I have three new unpopular opinions of my own, decided to include them here as well. They are completely unrelated to any of the above about Gen 1.
Firstly, I liked the following Pokémon feature better in the Isle of Armor than in HG/SS. While I think both of them have a terrible execution for the feature, the IOA wins because of one reason: it is optional there, which means I could turn it off and didn’t have to use it. So that was great, and it honestly made me very happy once I found out that I could turn it off. That said, I could see myself using following Pokémon feature in a future game, but as long as Game Freak insists on giving it a terrible execution, I’d rather not use it or not see it coming back at all.
Second, unsure if this is unpopular, but I don’t really like the TR system in S/S. I really loved how they gave TMs infinite uses in starting from gen 5 and while I’m glad they kept it for Gen 8, the TRs feel like a step backwards as they are one-time only. This could have been okay if there was some really good way to re-obtain more of them as many times as you want, but there isn’t really one. There are several ways to get more, but none are optimal. You can get them from the Watt traders in the wild area but that requires you to know which trader sells which TR and at which day. You can also get them from raids but that requires you to know which raid Pokémon gives which TR, then you actually have to find/create a raid with said Pokémon, as well as do the raid battle and actually win it in order to get the TR. The Isle of Armor gives two new options, the first one being that you can find various TRs as items in the overworld. That’s cool, but those are specific TRs only and they can still only be used once. You can also create any TR through the Cram-o-matic but that requires you to know the exact recipe to get a specific TR, and you can’t re-do it if you do something wrong since the game forces you to save before, meaning you can lose useful items if you screw up. So I’m not super fond of the TR system on the whole. It got a little better in the IOA, but I think there's room for further improvement.
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. Both of them start with a first pair (D/P and S/M) which have some notable flaws but are still very fun to play and bring new things to the series on the whole. However, their flaws get more notable the more you play them, and when they are compared to other games. Next up, we have a follow-up to the first pairs (Platinum and US/UM) which 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. Both of these follow-ups are also good games but not quite the games in the series (though I'd say Platinum was the best Pokémon game at its time, which I can't say for US/UM). Finally, both generations end with a remake (HG/SS and LGP/E). Those remakes had potential to be good, but they blew it all on bad gameplay and poorly executed features, they are filled to the brim with issues and feel like a step down from the original games or the previous remakes to the point that they are both among the worst games in the series. As a disclaimer I haven’t actually played LGP/E but based on what I know about them I don’t think I would like them all that much if I played them, they feel like a step down to FR/LG since they didn’t even include a lot of the things that made FR/LG so great to begin with. So yeah, I think Gen 4 and 7 are very similar when it comes to this.
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)
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
Banned deucer.
Hey, didn't expect a big response, but I'm happy to see someone invested enough for something in-depth like this!
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 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.
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 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.
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;
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?
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".
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!
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.
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.
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 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 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 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...
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.
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.
And I agree, no game is immune to criticism, and lord knows I wish the x/256 accuracy issue didn't exist.
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.
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 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.
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: