>next batch are filler games Pls stop

>>33460573
>batch
?

>>33460586
A pair of games.

>>33460573
>filler games
?

>>33460861
Any game that doesn't introduce a new generation of pokemon.

>>33460573
>are
?

>>33460573
stop?

>>33460865
Do you expect a new generation every year?

>>33460877
No. And I'm not OP if that's what you were thinking.

>>33460881
Don't lie to me boy

>>33460877
>expect
?

I'm kinda getting sick of all recent games being paired. The last standalone release was Platinum in 2008, and every release since has been a pair of games, even for games that should have been a single game.
>1996 - Red and Green, Blue
>1997 - break
>1998 - Yellow
>1999 - Gold and Silver
>2000 - Crystal
>2001 - break
>2002 - Ruby and Sapphire
>2003 - break
>2004 - FireRed and LeafGreen, Emerald
>2005 - break
>2006 - Diamond and Pearl
>2007 - break
>2008 - Platinum
>2009 - HeartGold and SoulSilver
>2010 - Black and White
>2011 - break
>2012 - Black 2 and White 2
>2013 - X and Y
>2014 - Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire
>2015 - break
>2016 - Sun and Moon
>2017 - Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon

Pair release years
>1996, 1999, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017
Single release years
>1996, 1998, 2000, 2004, 2008
Overlap years
>1996, 2004
Break years
>1997, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2011, 2015

They should have just done
>2012 - Grey
>2013 - X and Y
>2014 - Delta Emerald
>2015 - Z
>2016 - Sun and Moon
>2017 - Stars
>2018 - Ultra Platinum or whatever
>2019 - Gen VIII

Would have been a lot more consumer-friendly and the games probably would have been better too instead of splitting third versions back into two games.

>>33460910
>Lmplying I want sinnoh remakes on the 3ds
You skipped emerald too

>>33460910
>wanting a game every year
>wanting remakes
>wanting third versions
Fuck off. They should do more BW2 type games.

>>33460916
USUM are close, they're retelling and expanding on the story. They can't go straight into a full follow up, because we're getting that next year when we return to Kanto in the Switch games.

>>33460916
I don't want a game every year, but this board is hell with all the whiny faggots bitching about why there isn't a game on a certain year.

Remakes are hit or miss. I'd play original Gen I over FRLG, but it's not like FRLG are bad. They're just kinda boring and sterile. I'd play HGSS over Gen II though because they're improvements in almost every way and offer a bunch of Crystal content as well. I'd just play Emerald over ORAS though. I just hope they learned their lesson and don't butcher potential Sinnoh remakes.

Third versions are good, and B2W2 is ALMOST the ideal third version. If it was one game with the content of both, it would be perfect. Not only does it address various problems of the initial pair like a third version should, but it goes above and beyond and acts as a sequel as well.

>>33460912
Emerald was released in 2004 in Japan.
Also, I'd prefer it if the Sinnoh remakes were on the Switch. The 3DS doesn't need more mainline Pokémon games. Without the 3D, it's just 240p games in 2017.

>>33460941
USUM look to me like if they made "Crystal Gold" and "Crystal Silver" instead of Crystal, "Emerald Ruby" and "Emerald Sapphire" instead of Emerald, and "Platinum Diamond" and "Platinum Pearl" instead of Platinum. It just feels like they're splitting the content of a third version into two versions to sell more while not even giving us the B2W2 treatment and making a full-on sequel. You can describe Crystal, Emerald, and Platinum as "alternate retellings that expand on the story".

I certainly hope that the Switch game isn't Kanto again, even if it's a sequel. I'm getting sick of the nostalgia-pandering, and I LIKE Kanto.

>>33461001
>I'd prefer it if the Sinnoh remakes were on the Switch. The 3DS doesn't need more mainline Pokémon games. Without the 3D, it's just 240p games in 2017
That's basically what I said, its cool

>>33461032
I'd rather have them after the first set of gen 8 games

>>33461001
>I'm getting sick of the nostalgia-pandering, and I LIKE Kanto.

I think people overblow the amount of nostalgia pandering, most of what we've had is very minor references that would go unnoticed if it weren't for the anti-Gen 1 crowd screaming about them all the time. The Alolan forms were the most significant call back we've gotten and that was done for the anniversary (hopefully USUM branch out with them a bit).

But it was the original region, so obviously many people are going to have the most memories and fondness for it, even if a good chunk of the community is too young to appreciate it.

Mark my words, we'll be returning to Kanto before we see Sinnoh remakes. If fans are demanding remakes every second game release, there's no reason to skip the most popular one just because it was done before 13 years ago.

>>33461074
HGSS was originally my limit for remakes. I felt that they had a reason to exist beyond nostalgia since Gen II games were completely incompatible with all future games. They were left behind with Gen I (which did get remade) during the shift to Ruby and Sapphire. I had felt that Gen III remakes and later were unnecessary since Pokémon from Ruby and Sapphire could be transferred all the way up to the newest games. The situation I had imagined happening was the 3DS getting GBA games (Gen III) on the Virtual Console and DS games (Gen IV/V) on the eShop, and those hopefully having full compatibility with each other and being able to transfer ahead through each other or through a 3DS app. After ORAS was announced, I figured nothing like that would happen, so bring on Sinnoh (though now it's my current limit for remakes).

>>33460941
I think we will get gen 8 then sinnoh remakes on the switch. They are probably done with kanto pandering

>>33461099
There's a pretty big difference between being able to play the original Red and Blue and having new, fully 3D remakes. It's clear remakes are now being made for the sake of it and not because of technical necessities, so again, why wouldn't they go back and remake a 13+ year old game when it would obviously be more popular than redoing Sinnoh?

>>33461114
You can think that, but I'll be here to enjoy the tears.

>>33460894
Yes ? That's a word, what's the problem ?