i lost my interesterd after gold and silver.

i hard a time trying to play the GBA ones.

No. Just no. This only affects the battle system, and, though it is a pretty big change, it only changes how you strategize and the potential strength of a some Pokemon. It does little to nothign to reinvigorate the overall gameplay experience.

@Khuutra: I've give this thought, and it's hard to come up with solid ideas that don't either (a) have lots of flaws or (b) change the game TOO much. But one thing I think that would benefit the series with little to no cons would to be to ditch the whole "8 badges while occasionally stymying the semi-malignant efforts of an enigmatic team" and replace it with a more adventurous/exciting central narrative. That, along with a more open, broad, explorable world (a lot less linear) could go a long way to rekindling my interest in the games.

toooo lonnnnngggg, but I only played the first one and that was a great RPG, then I never touched another one because well, I didn't wanna collect them all again, takes too long.

 No to what? The fact that the change is huge? You seem to admit that it is. Again, if you are bored with the game thats fine. Regardless the game has gone through massive changes. Hai2u day/night cycles, hapiness, and pokemon abilities. EV training has been completely changed, and breeding is now possible. If you wanna say the story never changes then go ahead and do it. Saying the game never changes is either a lie, or just wrong. Just changing how you strategize is just changing the entire combat system of the game, and thats just what you do for 80% of your gametime.

I rarely agree with you in most of your post however I let most opinions slide and say "To each his own" to myself.

With this I actually do agree to an extent especially with the call of duty series where we see one year after year. Some games that actually give a good amount of time though between games such as the MGS series is ok though. They're not releasing game after game after game.

This should be done with pokemon though, but damn not owning one since red/blue is a long ass time.

Even in  rpgs i enjoy the battle system is usually just annoying filler to reaching fantastic vistas and meeting new and interesting characters. They changed the battle system big whoop.  How does that impact where i'm going and what i'm doing to get there.

The battle system is not the entire game and shouldn't be considered as such in an RPG.  Character and Stages and Developement should take center stage.

Pokemon, now, on the surface, is very similar to the old ones. But there's a lot of changes underneath.

It's too hardcore for me to get indept. All the crazy EV training, MinMaxing, etc...

I would like to see battle to evolve more though. Something like 3vs3 or some sort of assist moves where secondary pokemon assist the main ones on the battle field.

Except the series is still fun.

 I can respect that as an opinion, and can't offer much to counter it honestly. I don't see pokemon as an RPG but many obviously due. The problem is you can't say things like "the game never changes" if the game has made a lot of extremely significant changes that do alter gameplay. So logn as the gameplay is changing then the game itself must also be changing.

@Gnizmo You could have only played Red, play through Diamond, and never once notice any of the 'massive' changes that you cite. They are minor, and only affect competitive battling. That does not make the game massively changed.