It was FireRed and LeafGreen, not Fire Red and Leaf Green.

About damn time, most people seem to agree Gold/Silver/Crystal were the best games in the series. I hope they keep all the great features that they removed from later games (like the 7-day week) and also the improvements that made for Crystal.

So Nintendo is spending resources to NOT make brand new games?  Where have I seen this before?

This spells NO GOOD for E3 announcements.

I wonder if they will add any DSi specific content. Having DSi exclusive features in a Pokemon game is a surefire way to ensure major sales of the DSi.

Now why am I not surprised? I hope this isn't an indication of what to expect from E3... get the lame announcements out of the way now.

That may be because they had the biggest improvements out of all of the iterations, and at that point Pokémon was still relatively fresh and everyone hadn't gotten sick of it.

This is like the yearly sports game really... roster update and not much else.

But Pokemon main line games have never been yearly, I think. Though, with all the spin offs it must feel that way.

Regardless, I'm excited for this if only to see how complete Kanto will be. I would be so bad if Game Freak decided to cut off Kanto (not much of a remake at that point). Ooh, it would be great bonus to have the rainbow islands or Battle Frontier for twice the gym leaders!

Exactly, we are only in the 4th generation of Pokemon games, the main games have only been released once per handheld gen (Red/Blue/Yellow on the Game Boy, Gold/Silver/Crystal on the Game Boy Color, Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald on the Game Boy Advance, Diamond/Pearl/Platinum on the Nintendo DS).

I hardly consider this a "lame" announcement. This is actually a pretty huge announcement. I know I will get the Silver re-make. A re-make of 2 of the best handeld games ever is great, especially after the job they did with the previous Pokemon re-makes. These will also sell millions (and deserve to).

I don't see them taking out a huge chunk of the game by removing Kanto, especially since FireRed and LeafGreen showed that they will probably just add more stuff. I don't see them including the Sevii Islands, just sticking to basic Kanto.

They have already been remade twice now: Ruby and Sapphire were the first remakes, then Diamond and Pearl were the second remakes. The further lazy exploitation of this epitome-of-a-cash-in franchise definitely does not deserve to sell.

If you think that a remake of a remake which itself had remakes is a huge announcement, it must take very little to get you excited. A huge announcement would have been a Wii Pokémon RPG. A huge announcement would have been a Smash Brothers-style Pokémon fighting game. A huge announcement never involves a remake. A huge announcement is usually something surprising, but this couldn't have been more expected. This is lameness through-and-through.

I'm not sure where the "exploitation" part of Pokemon is.  Other than the remade games there has only been 4 real installments of the series.  And how are Ruby/Sapphire and Diamond/Pearl Remakes?  I'd love to hear it, and please be detailed, if only because the entire joke needs to be told before people can laugh at it properly.

Which standard of remake did you mean?  Your standard where even sequels can be considered remakes, or another set of standards?  Because a lot of sequels can be big deals.

Considering Gold and Silver were NOT re-makes, that is the first flaw with your argument. You may not care for this announcement, but that doesn't mean it isn't a big announcements. Considering you don't understand the difference between a sequel and a re-make though, I have a feeling you won't be able to recognize this.

The best part about the 2nd gen of Pokemon was the Day/Night cycle if only because it was never truly duplicated.  If you look at D/P/Pl (what?) the cycle is a complete joke.  The frequency of the running in to certain wild pokemon was slightly different, but in G/S/C, I couldn't catch a hoothoot with the sun out.

And Mop, I feel like you really need to justify your argument.

If there were only one thing in this world which I simply cannot stand, it would be dirt. Unfortunately, there are several other things which I cannot stand, such as dust and grime and grease and stains and so on. High up on this list is Pokémon, of which I long to cleanse the world of this plague that takes no prisoners. I've managed to remain relatively pure, but it seems I stand alone in my resistance.

It's all around us. Two versions of the exact same game, plus a "special edition" which follows a year or so later. So basically three versions of each game. The last two "generations" of the mainline games were barely improved over their predecessors, and actually removed some features. Remakes of the older games when the newer games are barely different; now it's not so much a wonder that Gold/Silver's features hadn't returned. Gotta give people a reason to purchase the remakes. The stadium-style games, which take the most boring aspect of the series and creates an entire game of it. Countless spin-offs, which even they have multiple versions such as the Mystery Dungeon games.

When I call the mainline series a "remake", it is being used here as a derogatory term.

The remake kind of remake. These aren't sequels, they are remakes. If this is a big deal, then so are the New Play Control! games. So is every piece of shovelware on Wii. Show some consistency in your standards here, people!

Which argument? I shouldn't try to justify anything because I can get really scary when my true hatred of Pokémon shines through. You think this is bad? You haven't seen anything yet.

Do you any actual, legitimate criticisms at all, or are you just somehow voicing irrational hate?  I mean, if this is your frame of reference is there really any hope of you convincing anybody about the truth of your positions?

You aren't really convincing anybody by just repeating it over and over.  Why. Are. They. Remakes?  That's what nickmitch is really asking you.  You haven't justified this rather strong opinion with anything other than you saying so.

See, it's things like this that make taking your opinion seriously difficult.  It seems like you are just trolling.  You hate Pokemon.  Yay.  Great.  But that doesn't make your argument true, nor does it serve as the basis for one either.  Pokemon is THE most popular RPG of all time, much, much, much more than any under it.  Pokemon Gold/Silver is the 2nd best selling RPG of all time.  A remake of it is a pretty big deal, if only to the Pokemon fans, which seem to out number any other fanbase, period.  Note how even the possibility of an FFVII remake for the PS3 was reported as huge news, and that has a much smaller fanbase in comparison.

And as a side note, they only split games into two "versions" specifically to encourage trading to complete the Pokedex.  They never intended people to buy both for one person.

Mop, your Birdo-addled arguments could be used for absolutely any sequel in the history of gaming.

Considering that the next game was titled "Grand Theft Auto IV", the games in between that and GTAIII are spin-offs at best. Also, I never said that Pokémon was the only series with remake-style sequels.

A little from column A, a little from column B. I definitely have a deep-rooted hatred for Pokémon, and I've already discussed it to death before and am trying really hard not to go there again by hoping my rants would have been ignored. Though I wouldn't call the hatred irrational... I'd say everyone else is irrational for buying the games. Of course, that in and of itself is probably irrational... :-\

Because Nintendo called them remakes in this announcement. Do I really have to explain it beyond that?

That's what happened with the original pair, but they definitely continue with the two-game thing because they know people buy them both. And the third "special edition" of the game is definitely targeting people who bought the original version(s).

Finally somebody gets it. In the past, people haven't cared for my rational arguments against Pokémon, so now I've resorted to trolling. It's just as non-effective and a lot more fun!  :)

I know, and it truly sickens me. I guess it is yet another thing in this world which I am not to understand.

*deep sigh*  Ok.  This is the quote in question:

Why are Ruby/Sapphire and Diamond/Pearl remakes?  That's a sort of crazy assertion.

Your evidence for all of this is?  Are you simply specuating with psychic powers?

Yeah Pokemon games tend to appeal to Pokemon fans.  Film at 11  Besides the third game is usually a testing ground for the new features that crawl into the next full version.  So even if you could vaguely call it a "remake" instead of a "Special edition" it's not like the additions do not warrant another version.  (Let it be known that I've never bought one of these special editions.)  There's nothing wrong with releasing a special edition, so long as there is actually something "special" about it, which in Pokemon's case, it usually is.  (Pokemon Crystal even had online play in Japan.)

Yeah and it's also against the rules.  So quit it.

Yeah.  We got it.  You don't like Pokemon.  Whatever.  That fact is registered.  Now beat it.  Seriously.

actually i see this as a GOOD indication for E3. this means that this was not to be an E3 announcement. so instead of this being a big announcement there will be something else.

and +1 to DSi version. it would be nice to see what DSi specific features you could pack into a pokemon game. (my pokemon ranch dsi? downloadable gyms? pokemon CALCULATOR!! ahahahaha.)

Let's make the online really awesome for this game, kay nintendo?

Possibly you could maybe have an online Diamond vs. HeartGold match?

LET'S HOPE BARRY WHITE IS A NEW LEGENDARY.

You know, that is a good take on it.  Nothing like Mario Kart Double Dash being a big surprise for E3 2003.

Would it be bad for me to wish that this entire release completely bombed and caused the Pokemon license to go into a Metroid-style hibernation for 8-10 years or so?  Yeah I know, maybe while that's going on Satan can set up an Ice Cream stand in Hell. 

I used to be a huge fan of the franchise (Blue, Yellow, LeafGreen, Pearl) and I did enjoy my time with Pokemon Pearl, but the core gameplay and presentation was still pretty much identical to that in the original game on the GameBoy, just with dual battles and equipable items.  This is Nintendo's version of Dragon Quest, and do we really need another series of Pokemon remakes when the series core gameplay and presentation has barely changed much since the original games?

As long as people keep buying this crap, Nintendo is never going to advance this series forward into something new and interesting.  Really, when you strip away the excess minigames and whatnot, what part of these games not only couldn't be done on the original GameBoy but WASN'T done on the original GameBoy?  These will probably be good games, as they've all been good if basic RPGs.  They're just completely unnecessary, and only further my extreme disinterest in the license.

And I thought you were a J-RPG fan...

Are your feelings speaking from a global perspective of gaming or just within your perspective of the genre?

For all the flak the J-RPG genre (fairly) gets for its stories and writing, the genre gameplay has changed radically over the years.  I'm playing FF9 right now (it's been in my backlog for years), and it's amazing just looking at where the genre was just 10 years ago compared to the more action-oriented, cinematic style it is right now.  I don't see a great deal of traditional turn-based battle systems with simple menus; low-frame animations; and low-grade music/sound effects anymore.  Unless you're talking about Dragon Quest and Pokemon, which irritatingly still play like their original incarnations and don't really take advantage of the platforms they're on.

Why would you want MORE movie style?

Whether you like this style or not is not the issue.  The issue was whether the genre had changed over the years, and it has.

Gold and Silver were fantastic for their time, but I'm not really excited about this.  It'll take something more complex than the standard Pokemon formula to get me into the series again...a "Pokemon Tactics," if you will. 

My brother is a big Pokemon fan.  He has all the real games, including FireRed/LeafGreen (not sure which of the two he has).  Yet when I told him about this he was iffy.  He hates the rehashing of Pokemon.  He hates how they always release a bullshit third version of each game.  He hates all the Pokemon spinoff junk.  But he loves the main series and if you strip away the bullshit you have four really kick ass games and a remake that's pretty decent.

For him to be disinterested in this is significant.  I don't think he felt FireRed/LeafGreen was really necessary.  Is Nintendo going to do this forever?  In a couple of years will a remake of Ruby/Sapphire be coming out?

The irony is Gold/Silver is considered the best Pokemon game because it was innovative and broke new ground and was everything a sequel should be.  A remake is like the exact opposite.  It's like Nintendo really doesn't understand why Gold/Silver is so respected in the first place.

Pokemon is like this super awesome game that any hardcore gamer should go nuts over, but it's marketed to rubes that fall for the same con again and again.  Can you think of ANY series like this where you have this absolute gem hidden under all sorts of rip-offs, rehashes and spinoff junk?

Final Fantasy's getting there, but it's not there yet.

Looks like I got myself into quite a mess last night. I should really stop posting in the AM hours. This was not good news for me to read late at night, because of my hatred of the franchise. I should have been able to hold back, but I didn’t. For this, I apologize.

Your original post quoted a comment of mine which was about Gold/Silver, that’s where that confusion stemmed from. As far as Ruby/Sapphire and Diamond/Pearl are concerned, I already explained this one. When I referred to them as a “remake”, I was using it as a derogatory term because they are incremental sequels. There is definitely some hypocrisy in this of course, since I like some game series which have incremental sequels, like Mario Party.

I didn’t like the new stuff introduced in Ruby/Sapphire. The natures gave stat-building more guesswork, the abilities added another random element to battles, and the team battles were just annoying. Plus, they removed the day/night system and day-of-the-week from Gold/Silver. There was probably more too but it’s been a while and I don’t really remember.

The thing with Pokémon is that I don’t like it to begin with, so any kind of incremental sequel – no matter how large or small the changes are – means I’m still not going to like it. They would have to make some drastic changes for me to enjoy the game… but then it wouldn’t really be a Pokémon game anymore, now would it? A spin-off which has some different type of gameplay would be the type of Pokémon game that would appeal to me, and that’s why the only Pokémon game I like is Pokémon Snap. Oh, and Pokémon Puzzle Challenge/League… not really sure if that counts or not.

If the multiple versions didn’t result in more sales overall, they wouldn’t have continued with them.

What other franchise releases a special edition of a game to test out features? There wasn’t a special edition of Super Mario 64 to test the ideas put forth in Super Mario Sunshine. It’s done to cash-in on a franchise. As far as being worth buying, that’s a matter of taste. I personally don’t think that new Pokémon poses in battle and a tacked-on battle arena are worth buying a whole other game for.

The difference here is that it really is my opinion, but I see your point.

I apologize if I upset anyone.

Pokemon has gotten way too complicated as it is. If you know whats up with all them monsters it becomes absolutely insane.

Yeah, I've read a few breeder/EV FAQs and the nuances are crazy. I could never get that into the game that way. It is very technical and very deep.

Yeah its exactly the reason why I never played anyone after diamond and pearl came out. I spend so much time IV breeding and working out all this crap that it made me go nuts and I just stoped playing. Though now I understand it better and back at it again. Its all these numbers and things that really affect the out come of battle that make it very interesting but very daunting at the same time.

You're 100% right.  It's true that you can spend days breeding the perfect pokemon, and weeks managing its stats so as to squeeze every last point out of your build.  That kind of behavior is largely unnecessary, though, unless you plan on duking it out with other players.  I've never really felt compelled to compete with other players, though, largely because many of my favorite pokemon are far from being powerhouses.  And also, I'm kind of old, and I'm pretty sure there's some kind of law against people my age trolling about for Pokemon match-ups.

Simply put, I don't find the basic combat mechanic to be very engaging, and just coming up with new moves in the next generation isn't going to make it any better.  Just adding new moves to the Pokemon formula is like coming up with new fist gesticulations for Rock-Paper-Scissors, or putting an 8-sided die in the ol' Pop-o-Matic Trouble bubble.  If only Nintendo would combine the addicting collection aspects of Pokemon with the strategic elements of Fire Emblem or Disgaea...oh, what a spin-off that would be.

While we're at it, how about ditching the story for say...something OTHER than being an 8-12 year-old charged by a (probably pedophiliac) old man to go around documenting all the Pokemon in the world (something that despite being a renowned scientist he just can't be bothered to have done any research on himself), while both repeatedly battling your hometown rival and ruining some grand Snidely Whiplash plot revolving around taking over/remaking the world with Pokemon?

I really want this announcement. Fuckers.

I just realized something. They are going to remake Emerald, Sapphire and Ruby. At the current pattern they will release a new set of games after the G/S/C remakes and after those they will probably release remakes of R/S/E. Then another new set, then they will remake Diamond, Peral and Platinum. Then another 'new' set. Then they will re-remake Red and Blue since those were the classics. I'm even more disturbed now.

I think they should stop making a whole lot of new Pokemon and just make a set of games with a random mixture of the old ones. Give us a choice from a number of the old starters and give us a variety of the classic legendary Pokemon to catch. Then they could focus on other aspects of the game like STORY and GAMEPLAY instead of creating a fifth clone of Rattata or Pidgey. How about some new types? There haven't been any new types since Gold/Silver. Crystal type? Digital type? Pokemon with three types? Just throwing them out here now.

Or how about dual type moves?  I always thought that would be cool!

I completely agree, Kurisu. Dual moves would have a really fun twist on things. Though for balance you might want to limit the amount of dual moves a given monster could have at once to one or two.

Beauty type. Their specialty would be charming and confusing the enemy by striking poses.

That's a good idea. There are enough Pokemon that seem to specialize in charm like Togepi and that Pokemon that evolves from Feebas that it could be a feasible type. Digital seems to make sense with Porygon. There could be a legendary digital type monster that is a virus similar to how Deoxys is a virus except this one is man made like Mewtwo.

I'm thinking too much about this stuff...