• 55 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Phatmac (5726 posts) -

HOENN CONFIRMED!

#2 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

I was initially gonna mock the Omega/Alpha parts of the titles, but then I remembered HeartGold and SoulSilver. Makes about as much sense.

#3 Edited by CrimsonAvenger (298 posts) -

It's about time. No ideas why they called them Alpha and Omega though. It sounds cool but I just don't understand what those words are supposed to mean in this situation. Also Mega Groudon and Kygore anybody? I'm sure we'll find out more about this game at E3. On another forum I actually said they would announce or show them off at E3. Hope I'm right.

#4 Edited by MEATBALL (3409 posts) -

I'm probably going to be labelled crazy, but RSE is definitely one of my least favourite Pokemon gens (beaten to being my least favourite by B/W, which just didn't capture me at all), that said, because I'm a sucker, I will probably wind up buying these games anyway. Because Pokemon. Pokemon is pretty awesome. Even when it's kind of average. >_>

#5 Posted by Phatmac (5726 posts) -

@meatball: I love third gen, just thought that the pokemon were better than silver and gold in general plus you could have cool secret bases and other crazy shit. I would've loved an emerald remake better though.

#6 Edited by TheBlue (426 posts) -

Oh wait...this is actually real?

Also, I wouldn't exactly have chosen the word "new" per se, unless it's not actually a remake but a brand new game set in Hoenn.

#7 Posted by cmblasko (1326 posts) -

"Epic 'new' adventure! Explore a 'new' world!"

Really?

Anyway, nitpicking aside I am looking forward to this as I never entirely played through the original Ruby/Sapphire games. Wonder if there will be an Emerald remake as well?

#8 Posted by Phatmac (5726 posts) -

@cmblasko: considering there never was a crystal remake I highly doubt it, unfortunately.

#9 Posted by GunslingerPanda (4849 posts) -

@meatball: You're not crazy, Ruby and Sapphire were godawful games. This is a waste of resources.

#10 Posted by CrimsonAvenger (298 posts) -

@phatmac said:

@cmblasko: considering there never was a crystal remake I highly doubt it, unfortunately.

Yes but HGSS incorporated elements of Crystal into the main story. I assume these games will do the same.

#11 Posted by Steadying (1429 posts) -

Why not just make a new game with a new storyline? I mean, I've only ever really gotten into Y so maybe there's something I'm not getting, but this series seems to have a needless amount of remakes. Just seems like that'd get really old after a while.

Online
#12 Posted by UlquioKani (1169 posts) -

This was my favourite generation so I'm mildly excited. If I had a 3DS, I would moderately excited.

#13 Edited by CrimsonAvenger (298 posts) -

@steadyingmeat said:

Why not just make a new game with a new storyline? I mean, I've only ever really gotten into Y so maybe there's something I'm not getting, but this series seems to have a needless amount of remakes. Just seems like that'd get really old after a while.

Currently many Hoenn pokemon are completely unavailable without breeding. It is also the only region without the physical special split and is the only region not on the DS. It's the last GBA only region.

#14 Edited by BisonHero (6836 posts) -

@steadyingmeat said:

Why not just make a new game with a new storyline? I mean, I've only ever really gotten into Y so maybe there's something I'm not getting, but this series seems to have a needless amount of remakes. Just seems like that'd get really old after a while.

While CrimsonAvenger said things that are true, I highly doubt those are the reasons these remake games are made. They're not thinking "Hey man, let's do the fans a solid and help them get Hoenn mons".

They do this because it's an easy way to put out twice as many Pokemon games (original and remakes) and they've already remade Red/Blue/Green and Gold/Silver/Crystal, so this is next in line.

Online
#15 Posted by Generic_username (634 posts) -

@meatball said:

I'm probably going to be labelled crazy, but RSE is definitely one of my least favourite Pokemon gens (beaten to being my least favourite by B/W, which just didn't capture me at all), that said, because I'm a sucker, I will probably wind up buying these games anyway. Because Pokemon. Pokemon is pretty awesome. Even when it's kind of average. >_>

I agree with you, actually. Well, as games, Ruby and Sapphire were pretty weak, it wasn't until Emerald that the games actually became good. And coming right after the incredible first and second gens didn't help.

Though I can guarantee I'll buy one of these, as X/Y have totally sucked me back in to Pokemon again.

#16 Edited by AndrewB (7686 posts) -

From the look of things and the emphasis on new (and the inclusion of mega evolutions), I don't think it's going to be a remake so much as a new "story" (I use the term loosely because Pokemon games have god awful stories) set in what will probably be a slightly extended version of the same Hoenn map.

I'm still weirdly excited despite the fact I've bought at least one game from the past two releases (White 2 and X/Y) but haven't finished either. I'm having more fun going back to the basics with my on-again-off-again playthrough of Blue (too bad the savegame battery is nearing end of life). I left off in the large hub city in Y so long ago and I can't remember what the heck I was supposed to be doing.

It could be interesting as a remake or a brand new game, though. Ruby/Sapphire were pretty awesome, and that alone with the upgraded mechanics since ye days of olde could be fun if they keep it simple compared to what that series has branched out into.

#17 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2575 posts) -

Why not just make a new game with a new storyline? I mean, I've only ever really gotten into Y so maybe there's something I'm not getting, but this series seems to have a needless amount of remakes. Just seems like that'd get really old after a while.

You mean like a new gen, or something ala Black2/White2? If it's the former, it's way too early for that, and as for the latter, well, I don't know.

These remakes are a long time coming for a lot of Pokemon fans. Have you ever watched a Nintendo Direct live and took a gander at the live chat? Yeah, it's full of kids typing in all caps "HOENN REMAKES MY BODY IS REGGIE!!!!11one"

#18 Posted by I_Stay_Puft (3712 posts) -

HERE WE GO AGAIN!

#19 Posted by TooWalrus (13255 posts) -

I'm down. At the time, the GBA was the only video game platform I had access to so naturally I played an unreasonable amount of those games. I'm pretty sure I actually caught 'em all at one point (except for those weird unobtainable event pokemon anyway). I'll play through this shit again in a heartbeat.

#20 Posted by cmblasko (1326 posts) -

@phatmac said:

@cmblasko: considering there never was a crystal remake I highly doubt it, unfortunately.

Well, so long as I can catch Rayquaza somehow...

#21 Posted by ManMadeGod (1584 posts) -

I remember not even beating those games "back in the day". Was never a fan of Gen 3, but if they create a new story and change the game significantly I might check it out.

#22 Edited by Deadmanforking (579 posts) -

Third gen is the only games in the series I've never played. So, kinda excited to play these.

#23 Posted by HeyGuys (557 posts) -

@meatball: I am right there with you man. right down to knowing I'll probably still buy one when it comes out, because I too am a sucker.

#24 Posted by Scrawnto (2462 posts) -

Kyogre got that bullshark testosterone! So alpha!

But for real, I played Ruby back in the day. I liked that generation's pokemon, maybe slightly more than G/S.

#25 Posted by Nightriff (5261 posts) -

I skipped this generation and have Emerald sitting in a box somewhere for a few years now so maybe this will finally get me to play these games, heard they are great from some friends but lets be real...silver is the best pokemon game.

Omega Ruby sounds badass too so I'll get that one probably

#26 Edited by Trusty_Spoon (84 posts) -

This was kinda expected but in the same breath has me wondering where pokemon Z is.

#27 Posted by JoeyRavn (5007 posts) -

This was kinda expected but in the same breath has me wondering where pokemon Z is.

It will probably be used next year if Nintendo decides to make a sequel to X and Y. I can totally see them naming the next games Pokémon XZ and YZ, instead of X2 and Y2.

Anyway, Hoenn fucking confirmed. I don't know where this came from, but, boy, I'm glad it exists.

#28 Edited by LordAndrew (14430 posts) -

Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire sound like bootleg Pokémon games that you'd buy alongside Sonic the Hedgehog 7 and Final Fantasy X 2D.

#29 Posted by afabs515 (1264 posts) -

Don't get me wrong: I'm happy for everyone who's gonna buy this game and enjoy it, but when I saw this announcement, I was pretty disappointed. I would much rather have a new game with a new world with a more mature storyline than a remake of old games. Of course, my opinion could be colored by the fact that I hate Gen III, but whatever.

#30 Posted by alwaysbebombing (1628 posts) -

You'd think we cured cancer with how excited twitter was.

#31 Posted by HammondofTexas (840 posts) -

Can't wait for this! Never had a GBA as a kid, so I will definitely be picking this up!

#32 Edited by Hungry (166 posts) -

@andrewb said:

From the look of things and the emphasis on new (and the inclusion of mega evolutions), I don't think it's going to be a remake so much as a new "story" (I use the term loosely because Pokemon games have god awful stories) set in what will probably be a slightly extended version of the same Hoenn map.

I'm still weirdly excited despite the fact I've bought at least one game from the past two releases (White 2 and X/Y) but haven't finished either. I'm having more fun going back to the basics with my on-again-off-again playthrough of Blue (too bad the savegame battery is nearing end of life). I left off in the large hub city in Y so long ago and I can't remember what the heck I was supposed to be doing.

It could be interesting as a remake or a brand new game, though. Ruby/Sapphire were pretty awesome, and that alone with the upgraded mechanics since ye days of olde could be fun if they keep it simple compared to what that series has branched out into.

If it is not a remake the person who decided the names of these games needs to be fired. It follows the naming conventions of the remakes (Fire Red, Leaf Green, Heart Gold, Soul Silver) but it isn't a remake? I can already see thousands of people being confused about the game because they decided to go against a convention that has multiple games behind it.

It would be like if Final Fantasy XVI was all of a sudden a direct sequel to Final Fantasy IX despite not being called IX-2 or something like that.

#33 Posted by Hunter5024 (5912 posts) -

I have a ton of nostalgia for this generation, and I was really hoping this would be the next Pokemon game. But lets stop remaking Pokemon games after this. Screw Sinnoh.

#34 Posted by Forcen (1847 posts) -

Is it a confirmed remake?

#35 Posted by Capum15 (4967 posts) -

Emerald was, and still is, my favorite Pokemon game. Hope there's a remake of that one, but I doubt it, so I guess I'll just get both of these because I hate money I guess.

Still, definitely looking forward to 'em.

#36 Posted by EuanDewar (5094 posts) -

FUCKING YESSSSS LETS DO THIS KYOGRE MY SON

#37 Posted by JJOR64 (19052 posts) -

My favorite region is finally being remade! I'm so happy right now.

#38 Posted by JackSukeru (5950 posts) -

Coming from having played Crystal gen 3 was a disappointment for me. It felt really scaled back as it substituted the neat phone gadget thing with a lame, and less personality filled, alternative. It also lacked a day and night cycle. Still, those areas have their charm, and at the very least I want to see what they've done to the place using the X&Y style graphics. We'll see.

#39 Posted by ArbitraryWater (12008 posts) -

Even as a kid I thought that Ruby and Sapphire were a step back from Gold/Silver/Crystal. There are some decent to great pokemon from that generation, but... bleh. Gen 3 is the weakest pokemon gen. Contests? Having like 8 HMs? That dumb kid with the Ralts being your rival? Nah. I have some nostalgia for Ruby version and I enjoyed X enough to sink a disturbing amount of time into it, but I think this is where I draw my line.

#40 Posted by Dixavd (1367 posts) -

Isn't the alpha/omega thing to do with the two bad-guy terms in the Hoenn Region. They weren't called Alpha and Omega but I remember it being a term each used specifically for some reason (maybe their code-name for Groudon and Kyogre?) I'll google this...

#41 Posted by BradBrains (1146 posts) -

these were probably the worst pokemon games. just release 3ds version of red and green.

but hey im sure for some younger kids it was the one they grew up with so power to em

#42 Edited by Bollard (5765 posts) -

Second worst games in the series after Diamond/Pearl, yet probably the one I played the most/second most.

#43 Posted by Dixavd (1367 posts) -

...Gah! I can't even look up my theory from semi-remembering the terms Alpha and Omega being used due to the first 5 pages of google and the like being related to the new announcement.

these were probably the worst pokemon games. just release 3ds version of red and green.

but hey im sure for some younger kids it was the one they grew up with so power to em

I would like to say that the story in Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire (and Emerald) were the best in the series. I've played almost every game in the series starting from Blue (missing the original Japanese Green/Red prior to the west's Red/Blue as well as a couple non-main games such as XD, Trozei and the last two Ranger and Mystery Dungeon games); and Gen 3's use of Pokémon in the story is by far the most creative without becoming completely laughable (although the scene with Kyogre and Groudon together is hilarious when you take into account how they are surrounded by the sea leaving Groudon stuck on a tiny rock - makes there rivalry seem clearly to Kyogre's advantage).

Also, it's the series where the distinction between Ruby and Sapphire as games is important. Every other game in the main-line series has had trivial differences between its pair-games (usually down to just which legendary appeared or maybe - in the case of Black/White/1&2 - a different town/mechanic). The difference is important for story reasons. The two games are distinctly different with key scenes playing out differently in both (actually changing where the player is at specific points in the story - meaning playing both is important to understand the motivations and interactions of the two villainous teams).

Also Ruby and Sapphire had some very unique design decisions not seen in any game - take for instance the player's father who actually exists and is a Gym Leader, or the symbolic creation of the Pokémon in the region to be designed in a way to represent the specific geometry and set-up of Hoenn as a region, making it the only game in the series where the distinction of the specific Pokémon that live in the region is actually explained and developed in properties and designs on the Pokémon (Especially when taking into account the game's Facination with the Seasons, a key importance to the story and the cause of the distinctive region's geometry and Pokémon).

Some of us love the games for what they did and what makes them unique! (why must all other regions be based off a country and cities and places within rather than Hoenns design on Geography being the important part and not just a reflection of a place that exists in the world today - you know an overall feel that makes the region memorable and different - sort of like what the Elder Scrolls series does with places like Skyrim and Morrowind?!)

By the way, I'm not attacking you or anything, I just wanted to explain why some of us have a love for these games and a wish for them to be remade/expanded on more than just nostalgia (if you must know, I'm most nostalgic for the Silver/Gold games despite Blue bring my first, and the decisions in Ruby/Sapphire to be the most memorable and impressive to me).

#44 Posted by Slaps2 (304 posts) -

Best Pokemon game ever... but FUCK REMAKES!

Online
#45 Posted by Hunter5024 (5912 posts) -

@darkstalker: @arbitrarywater: Sure Generation 3 was a step down from 2, but so was every pokemon game. The worst generation? In Sinnoh one of the gym puzzles was basic addition and subtraction.

#46 Edited by TheManWithNoPlan (5903 posts) -

(Copy/Paste comment from the trailer posted earlier)

I'm sure a lot of people will be a negative nancy about this, but I'm psyched! I don't care if it's more of the same. It's something I know I'll like and that brings me happiness.

#47 Edited by Marokai (3115 posts) -

@arbitrarywater said:

Even as a kid I thought that Ruby and Sapphire were a step back from Gold/Silver/Crystal. There are some decent to great pokemon from that generation, but... bleh. Gen 3 is the weakest pokemon gen. Contests? Having like 8 HMs? That dumb kid with the Ralts being your rival? Nah. I have some nostalgia for Ruby version and I enjoyed X enough to sink a disturbing amount of time into it, but I think this is where I draw my line.

I had a similar reaction when I was much younger after Ruby and Sapphire came out. I worried for a long time after their release that I was just growing out of Pokemon and leaving it behind, but once I played Diamond I realized Gen 3 just brought nothing interesting to the table and I didn't much care for the style and sound of the entire region. Gen 2 was just such a high point.

#48 Posted by crithon (3441 posts) -

I knew this was coming, because GBA was phased out since the DSi and Pokemon should be able to be caught in every single generation. BUT..... Was this too soon?

Ruby and Sapphire 2002 then Leaf Green and Fire Red 2004.

Diamond and Pearl 2006/2007 then Heart Gold and Soul Silver 2009/2010

now this is a time span of a YEAR. I felt they could either waited another year..... or is Nintendo desperate for money? (12 million world wide sales in less then a year) Or is Pokemon team so well handled they can churn these out annually?

#49 Edited by Dixavd (1367 posts) -

@crithon: Have you thought that maybe the games were being made at the same time time as X and Y? That they've had much more than a year in development of both. That the engine and the ability to get X and Y to work with the movement to 3D was actually done prior to Black 2 and White 2 being completed. Game studios, especially efficient game studios, are always half a decade ahead in development to shipping a game (that is to say, when they ship a game, they already have in development the game 5 years down the line regardless of whether than is the next game in the series). You can knock them for doing that (it's something people have against Call of Duty, for example, where it seems to be creating some un-wanted issues/inconsistencies) but you can't argue that it doesn't get results*

It's one of the reasons why people pandering to developers is such a weird thing since, if the game they want isn't already in development, were they to actually respond to the player-base and decide to make it when the petitions/vocal-group hit critical mass, the game that would be released would likely come out 3-7 years later when the hunger for it could have dissappated.

*Even for Call of Duty (a series in a genre that I don't like, so maybe I'm wrong on this assertion but...) I'm impressed they can even keep the games semi-consistent (even when taking into account the huge anger that those that like the series have each time when going against changes) despite building games this way (even though they have a huge budget, that doesn't really make up for it). Also their games can actually somewhat respond to games on the market when they are released despite how long in development it has been and how long ago those decisions would have had to be made (though this is probably an inverse relationship, the games on the market now would have been in development not much further back than the current Call of Duty one, so the assortment of things in the news and generally thought about in the genre would be affecting the games at this critical moment in design in the same ways - resulting in games that, when taking broadstrokes, look very similar in both aim and execution.

#50 Posted by crithon (3441 posts) -

@dixavd: that's what I meant near the end of my comment. That game freaks is so well run that it could make these games effortlessly.