Will you ever be satisfied with a Game freak product

They've been improving a lot between Ultra Sun/Moon, Sword/Shield and Legends Arceus. They might catch up with modern Nintendo titles within their next two games.

Attached: B5172844-EB0F-46D4-83D4-2B9895D3E66F.jpg (1280x720, 248.99K)

Never fully satisfied

I'm satisfied with Gens 1 - 4. Even if they do make a good game again, I wouldn't really care because I know I'll always have the first four Gens + ROM hacks to fall back on.
>inb4 unovatrannies acting all surprised and offended that i didn't include their nu-gen game with the golden era
Fuck off. Seriously.

Attached: Shigeki_Morimoto.jpg (396x583, 32.7K)

You can have your opinion that Gen 5 isn't good, but many people simply don't agree and Unova is part of the old era more than it is of the new era.

Gen 4 is nu-gen, zoomer. Gen 3 was the last good one.

I am Gens 1-5 is the Golden Era, and expressing that opinion shouldn't be considered seething. Anyway, the outliers to this would probably be Gen 7 (which is still worse than 1-5 but better than 6 and 8) and Legends, which made many innovations and needs financial incentives.

Explain why Gen 5 is as good as HGSS/Pt/Emerald.

Gen 5 was the last time Pokemon aspired to be art. It was far from perfect but it was the culmination of 12 years of experience in the 2D adventure space. It showed tons of effort and ambition in both plot, gameplay, and artwork even if misguided at times. Some people might not appreciate it but that's already a subjectivity discussion.

>Gen 5 was [headcanon].
So you have nothing of substance to provide. Got it.

Gens 1 - 4 is still the Golden Era of Pokémon and HGSS is the peak of this franchise.

Not him, but how is gen 1-4 the “golden era”?

Because it has content, overall good Pokémon designs, more focus on adventuring with your Pokémon than the story and characters, and non-linearity.

No matter what genuine metric you create for what a good game is, it will never be the case the Gens 1-4 are above the line and Gen 5 isn't. That's because it isn't any worse. On the contrary, Gens 6-8 are worse than what came before.

>Will you ever be satisfied with a Game freak product
Probably not. For everything they get right they take something away so they never feel fully satisfying.

Actual areas to explore, special trainer rematches like N and Colress, PWT, Battle Subway, Pokestar studios, Black City/White Forest, character sidequests and other stuff like the Join Avenue.

>Gen 4
>overall good pokemon designs
Lmao, gen 4 is when there started being more bad designs than good ones

>content
Gen 5 has more content than Gens 6-8, and thus fits as well.
>overall good pokemon designs
this is 100% subjective and Unova's designs "being bad" was really just a mass ass-covering for those who shat on gen 5 prematurely and needed something to criticize desperately. They're not any worse. On the contrary, gens 6+ actually had a more fundamental design shift.
>non-linearity
Gen 5 replaced "muh gym badges out of order" with more optional and mostly optional locations to backtrack and sidetrack to, which makes it non-linear. your favorite YouTuber saying it's linear doesn't mean it is.

I don't want Pokémon to be a mediocre Monster Hunter clone if that's what you're asking.

>They've been improving a lot between Ultra Sun/Moon, Sword/Shield and Legends Arceus
Quality took a nose dive with Swoshi

>content
B2W2 also has content which are mentioned in >overall good Pokemon designs
Overly subjective. In fact, plenty of people claimed that Gen 4 contribute to the “decline” on designs
>more focus on adventuring with your Pokemon than the story and characters
True, but more so in the case of Gen 1 and 2
>non-linearity
Gen 1 and 2 are more what I can say “non-linear” than Gen 3 and 4.

>Gen 5 has more content than Gens 6-8, and thus fits as well.
And it has less than what came before. Whereas Gens 1 - 4 all had more content and built on the previous games.
>this is 100% subjective and Unova's designs "being bad" was really just a mass ass-covering for those who shat on gen 5 prematurely and needed something to criticize desperately. They're not any worse. On the contrary, gens 6+ actually had a more fundamental design shift.
This is a gigacope. Most people agree that Gens 4-5 was when Pokémon designs started getting bad, with Gen 5 being the most commonly agreed opinion.
>Gen 5 replaced "muh gym badges out of order" with more optional and mostly optional locations to backtrack and sidetrack to, which makes it non-linear. your favorite YouTuber saying it's linear doesn't mean it is.
This may be true, but having more exploration options doesn't make it non-linear lmfao.

Having played a fuckload of MHR literal days before PLA dropped (complete coincidence btw), I don't understand this comparison at all.

Pokémon just isn’t the same in 3D. I think 2D is what made Pokémon

No way, gen IV had some bad designs, but gen V had about the same number of positive-to-good designs and twice as many designs overall. All gens have dud designs, but only V had a majority of designs that were duds.

>And it has less than what came before.
No, gens 5 removed previous features and provided replacements, just like what Gens 3 and 4 did. Gens 6 took more steps back than forward, and so did the subsequent generations.
>many people say so therefore it's true
Initial vocal minorities are always what you really see the most. Whenever there is an initial outcry, that somehow becomes the default opinion even though it may or may not be what more people actually believe. We saw that type of autistic behavior recently with Kleavor. Absolutely based design and everyone knows it, deep down inside. What happened? The PLA doomposters took very quick and vocal action, and now calling it a shit design is the default opinion. When there is a vocal minority early on, they define the default opinion. The same shit happened in 2010 with Gen 5.
>having more exploration options doesn't make it non-linear
If going off the line still means it's linear, What makes something nonlinear?