Quantcast
Gen 1 had the worst Pokémon, in my opinion

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Gen 1 had the worst Pokémon, in my opinion

The correct ranking is the following.

1: Gen 2
2: Gen 1
3: Gen 5
4: Gen 4
5: Gen 6
6: Gen 3
7: Gen 7

Why anyone values Gen 3 so high baffles me. But anyway, this is the correct ranking, anyone else arguing against should be examined.



Liberate Hong Kong, the revolution of our times!

Around the Network

Couldn't disagree more. Gen 1 and next gen 5 are my personal favourites. Gen 2 has literally 1 memorable 'mon as far as i'm concerned, in scizor but even that is possibly because it got a mean mega in gen 6.



DON'T WIN ME CHIBI BUDDY DON'T WIN ME.

ANIMAL CROSSING NEW LEAF FRIEND CODE:- 5129 1175 1029. MESSAGE ME.
ANDY MURRAY:- GRAND SLAM WINNER!

In my opinion the N64 was not just the best console of the 5th gen but, to this day the best console ever created!

Gen 1 was the best Pokemon in my opinion. Its when they started moving into gen 2 i never went back to it. To this day Pokemon was at its Prime at Red/Blue/Green.



Currently playing Pokemon Yellow on the 3DS VC and enjoying a lot to the point of considering the Gen 1 designs the classic ones.

Compared to what I have seen of other gens of course.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


LuccaCardoso1 said:
theprof00 said:
Look, as an objective opinion, gen 1 was really conservative with their designs.

There's no such thing as an objective opinion. If it's objective, then it's not an opinion. But yeah, they were conservative with the designs. Probably because of hardware limitations, tbh.

There's a lot more to address here, but just quickly, objective opinion is an actual term. You're just taking the definition of subjectivity and applying it to disprove the existence of the other.  But an opinion is just a statement that lacks and substantial proof.

For instance, I can't actually prove that gen 1 was conservative, but I estimate that the majority of people would consider gen 1 to be conservative or simple, even if overly so. I make this statement in objectivity. ie; I am not influenced by my own desires, wants, or outside factors. I honestly have no care for pokemon gen 1 or otherwise though I do appreciate its appeal and artistic style.

Objective opinion is an actual thing. While I'm almost certain I've heard someone on a forum or facebook say that the two words are contradictory, I would urge you to take another look at the definitions of all three and gently reassess whatever conclusion you were influenced into making.



Around the Network
LuccaCardoso1 said:
SecondWar said:

For your evolution differences, Metapod looks nothing like Butterfree but it still works. Plus Dragonite does resemble Dragonair, but has a colour change and arms and legs. Still the same serpent shape though.

That's because Metapod is cocoon. Cocoons are supposed to look completely different from the final form. Dragonair and Graveler are not cocoons. Btw, Dragonair and Dragonite are completely different. Dragonair is a serpent, Dragonite is a chubby dinosaur with some tiny wings. They have completely different color schemes too.

Magikarp should have evolved into Dragonite and Dragonair should have evolved into Gyarados. At least, this would have made more sense aesthetically. 



Only played the first generation and the last one (last game anyway, maybe some of them are more ancient?). And I think the first one is far better. You complain about it, but in the last one you have a normal looking dog pokemon, a cow pokemon, a seagull pokemon, a horse pokemon... I facepalmed a lot while playing Sun and kept saying "Wow, they really ran out of ideas, wtf is that?".



Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. The facts say you're wrong and gen 1 is awesome.



*now that I have that nostalgic outburst out of the way*

Two main points, both centred around the need to place generation 1 in context, and not judge it based on the standards of today:

1. As obvious an idea as Pokemon seem now, it wasn't back then. They'd have been subject to resource constraints, timelines, limited technology and the need to deliver a minimum viable product in a way they just are not these days (due to the massive sales any mainline Pokemon game can expect and the more powerful consoles)

2. In the early days, the whole allure of the project was our ability to place ourselves in Pokemon's world. Hence the need for a multitude of believable, relatable Pokemon that look like they might fit in to our lives. Remember this was in concert with the (then) hugely popular TV show and playing cards. It was all designed to draw kids in. With a built in audience we've been able to move away from that a bit.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Gen 3 is the best IMO, it was the last gen without having the designs go "Extra".