Some more short thoughts on various recent topics:
Gen 4 being similar to Gen 3
I have never thought about this before, but after reading posts by others about it now, I can definitely see it. That said, I definitely agree that Gen 4 should be considered a spritual successor or a refinement of Gen 3, not a "clone" or something along those lines.
I also feel that there are a lot that Gen 3 does similar to Gen 1, I thought about this recently and I guess this is a good opportunity to bring it up. For instance, many Gen 3 Pokémon are similar to various Pokémon from Gen 1. Some notable examples are the Wurmple line and the Caterpie/Weedle lines, the Skitty and Meowth lines, the Corphish and Krabby lines, the Spheal and Seel lines, the Feebas and Magikarp lines, and possibly others too. It is funny because Gen 5 often gets a lot of hate for having many Pokémon similar to Pokémon from Gen 1, but after looking a little deeper, I feel that the same goes for Gen 3. I remember reading old Serebii threads a while ago and one common complaint about Gen 3 back during the the days when it was the newest was just this, how many Pokémon were "rip-offs" of old ones.
As for more similarities, both Gen 1 and 3 start with a Rock-type Gym (which Gen 4 does as well) and has an Electric-type Gym as the third Gym. There are also Fire-, Psychic-, and Water-type Gyms throughout the regions (although in different orders) and technically a Fighting-type Gym as well if we count the Dojo in Saffron in the Kanto games. Regarding the E4, there are many similarities as well. Three of the Hoenn E4 members use the same types as the E4 in Kanto (Ghost, Ice and Dragon). Their genders are also the same (Drake and Lance are male, Phoebe, Glacia, Agatha and Lorelei are female). Then the last member of the Hoenn E4 uses Dark-types, while Johto previously had a Dark-type user in its E4.
So there are a lot of similarities between Gen 1 and Gen 3 as well, though I wouldn't go as far as to consider Gen 3 a "rip-off" of Gen 1 or something. And I don't consider this to be something negative towards Gen 3 either, I really feel that it manages to have its own identity despite having many similarities to Gen 1. The same goes for Gen 4, which I feel manages have an identity of its own despite having many similarities to Gen 3.
Also, regarding new fans of the series. I believe that every generation creates new fans, not just Gen 4 & 6. Though, those might have created more new fans than other generations, maybe there are "waves" of new fans once in a while, I don't really know.
Sinnoh Gyms
Not sure if I prefer the ones in D/P or Platinum, it has been too long since I played the main story of the Sinnoh games so I don't really remember how they were. However, one thing I was a little disappointed by in Platinum was how it did not feature completely new puzzles or layouts for every Gym, like Emerald did (except for the Petalburg Gym). But that's okay, I still like Platinum a lot.
Alder
I agree about Alder being a great Champion (he's my second favorite after all). His character, backstory and involvement in the main story is amazing. I still prefer Iris though.
Should Unova have been based on the San Francisco Bay Area instead of New York?
I don't think so. I think it was fine that they based Unova on New York. Though I wouldn't mind if they made a region based on the SF Bay Area in the future. I'm not from the US and the only two major US cities I have visited for more than a day are Phoenix and Chicago, so I think that making regions based on other US cities/areas are very welcome because it feels quite exotic for me.
Is Unova overrated, and is Alola underrated?
I don't think so. Unova is my favorite region, so I think it deserves the praise it gets. On the other hand, I think Alola as a region is average at best. It was okay in the end, but not quite on the same level as Unova, Sinnoh, Hoenn or Kalos. So it does not deserve too much praise. IMO, both regions are correctly rated rather than over/underrated.
SM or US/UM?
Back to yet another endless discussion subject. As I have stated many times before, I prefer US/UM. Should the things they added have been DLC for S/M instead? Yes. But now that's not the case, and because of that, I prefer US/UM because they are the games that have many of the things that S/M are missing. I really can't see any reason to go back to S/M after playing US/UM. Yes, US/UM could have made more and better improvements, but what they did are enough for me.
Overall I do really like ORAS, and appreciate it even more now in hindsight because when I look at it for what it is, and not for what I wanted it to be, I can truly appreciate it for the fact that it really is great in its own right and does a great job in reimagining the RSE experience in a modern light, just in a different fashion from how HGSS did it with GSC.
Just wanted to say that I agree with this. I feel the same way about OR/AS, and about many other games as well. Over time, I have come to appreciate many games for what they are, not for what I wanted them to be or for what they could have been. This is mostly notably for the games from Gen 6 and on. I have always liked X/Y but I have really learned to appreciate them more over time. And as said, the same goes for OR/AS. As well as US/UM and S/S, for that matter. Sadly, I don't feel that way about S/M because I prefer US/UM. I wish I could say this for HG/SS as well, but I feel they just have too many issues to the point that I don't think I can ever appreciate them for what they are rather than what I think they could and should have been.
Not to mention they removed many Pokemon from base Alola in exchange for the increased regional PokéDex size.
Which ones did they remove? I can't think of any apart from the Island Scan Pokémon, and the ones that got removed got replaced by others anyway.