The Instigator
Cutiepuffle
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
Phoenix61397
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Generation 1 was the Worst Pokemon Generation

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Cutiepuffle
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/5/2014 Category: Games
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,934 times Debate No: 54099
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

Cutiepuffle

Pro

Rules:
1. You may not rebut anything in the same round.
2. Round 1 is acceptance only.
3. Mention which Generation you're arguing as the worst in Round 1.
4. No swearing.
5. Pictures are discouraged, but if you must, keep it small.
6. Bulbapedia is a valid source.

If you break any rules, you forfeit the debate.

Voter Rules:
1. You may not take off spelling and grammar because a debater quotes a spelling/grammar mistake an opponent made.

Phoenix61397

Con

I accept. As the resolution on top stated, I will be arguing that generation one was NOT the worst, as pro had the burden of proof. I will be mostly concentrating on this argument. All I have to do is prove that generation one was better than ANY other generation. However, if I must state which generation I think is the worst, I'd go with generation 6. I await the pro's opening argument.
Debate Round No. 1
Cutiepuffle

Pro

Argument 1: Pokemon Originality.

The Pokemon the games are terribly unoriginal.

Grimer, a pile of sludge evolves into a bigger pile of sludge.
Diglett evolves into 3 Digletts. Same for Magnemite.


Argument 2: Graphics.
Yes, I know these games came out the earliest,and have a good reason for being this way, but since we're comparing games side by side, no matter the release date, Generation 1's graphics were horrible compared to the rest.

Which looks better?

This?



Or this?


The point I'm making in this argument is that the graphics aged badly.


Argument 3:

The storyline is catch all Pokemon and beat the champion. Oh yeah, Team Rocket does random crap too. Once again, I know this was the first game and was a bit of a rough draft, but compared to Ruby and Sapphire's conflicting teams, Sinnoh's lore, and Black and White's ending, you can see it's story also aged badly.

Let's take a look at the description of Gen 4's plot from Wikipedia.


The games chronicle the adventures of a new Pokémon trainer who strives to become the Pokémon League Champion by collecting and training Pokémon. Like most games in the series, Diamond and Pearl feature eight Pokémon gyms led by Gym Leaders, professional trainers whose expertise lies in a particular Pokémon type. Gym Leaders (Roark, Gardenia, Maylene, Wake, Fantina, Byron, Candace, and Volkner) serve as bosses and reward skilled trainers with Gym badges, key to the advancement of the plot. As in Ruby and Sapphire, the protagonist must also thwart the schemes of a crime syndicate (and here it is Team Galactic) who plan to use Pokémon to restructure the region into a utopia.

Like all other Pokémon RPGs, Diamond and Pearl begin in the protagonist's hometown. After viewing a television report about a media-conducted search for a Red Gyaradosspotted at a far-away lake (Johto's Lake of Rage),[22] the protagonist and his/her best friend travel together to check the local lake for a Pokémon like it. They spot Professor Rowan, a Pokémon evolution researcher, and his assistant, the playable character not selected in the game: Lucas (boy) or Dawn (girl). After a short discussion the professor and his assistant leave the lake, leaving a briefcase behind. When they are attacked by wild Starly, the protagonist and his/her rival examine the case. The player is then given a choice among the three Pokémon found in the briefcase (Turtwig, Chimchar, or Piplup) with which to battle the Starly. After defeating the Starly, Lucas or Dawn retrieves and returns the briefcase to the professor. Noticing that a bond has been forged between the young protagonist and his/her chosen Pokémon, Rowan offers it to him/her, asking that he/she embark on a journey and fill his/her Pokédex.

The protagonist encounters the main antagonist, Team Galactic, early in the game, when he/she must save Professor Rowan from its thugs; however, its motives are unclear until later. The protagonist encounters the Team twice (when it takes over a wind farm and when it sets up a base in Eterna City) before it takes over Sinnoh's three lakes in an attempt to capture the Mirage Pokémon (Uxie, Azelf, and Mesprit). Shortly after the player earns their seventh Gym Badge, Team Galactic captures the Mirage Pokémon and imprisons them inside the science laboratory of the Team Galactic Headquarters Building, where its members extract crystals from the Pokémon to create the Red Chain, an object that can control the legendary Pokémon Palkia (in Pearl) or Dialga (in Diamond) (both in Pokémon Platinum, though Giratina appears after this). After releasing the trio, the protagonist is able to access the cave atop Mt. Coronet, where the leader of Team Galactic awakens Dialga or Palkia. The legendary Pokémon's powers begin to overwhelm Sinnoh, causing the newly free Uxie, Azelf, and Mesprit to attempt to stop it. The player then battles Palkia/Dialga; after defeating or capturing the Pokémon, Sinnoh returns to normal. After this, the player will continue, eventually battling the Sinnoh Region Pokémon League's Elite Four: Aaron, Bertha, Flint, and Lucian. After defeating all four members, the player will battle the Sinnoh League champion, a woman named Cynthia, who had appeared before in the game. If the protagonist beats Cynthia, he or she is the new Sinnoh League champion, beating the game. After the player beats the game, there is a new island to explore filled with other types of Pokémon. Their old friend, who challenged them to battles multiple times before in the game, will be waiting for them here, and challenge them to another battle. On this island, there are also stores and a tournament center.


This is Gen 1's plot. (Also from Wikipedia)

After venturing alone into deep grass, a voice warns the player to stop in which is revealed to be Professor Oak, a famous Pokémon researcher. Professor Oak explains to the player that wild Pokémon may be living there, and encountering them alone can be very dangerous.[25] He takes the player to his laboratory where the player meets Oak's grandson, a rival aspiring Pokémon Trainer. The player and the rival are both instructed to select a starter Pokémon for their travels out of Bulbasaur, Squirtle, and Charmander.[26] Oak's Grandson will always choose the Pokémon which is stronger against the player's starting Pokémon. He will then challenge the player to a Pokémon battle with their newly obtained Pokémon, and will continue to battle the player at certain points throughout the games.[27]

While visiting the region's cities, the player will encounter special establishments called Gyms. Inside these buildings are Gym Leaders, each of whom the player must defeat in a Pokémon battle to obtain a total of eight Gym Badges. Once the badges are acquired, the player is given permission to enter the Pokémon League, which consists of the best Pokémon trainers in the region. There the player will battle the Elite Four and finally the new Champion: the player's rival.[28] Also, throughout the game the player will have to battle against the forces of Team Rocket, a criminal organization that abuses Pokémon.[14] They devise numerous plans for stealing rare Pokémon, which the player must foil.


It's much shorter. Also, the last paragraph on Gen 4 is much more exciting. Kidnapping 3 legendaries to create a new world and destroy sounds better than special establishmets called gyms. Oh yeah, Gen 4 has those "gyms" too. Gen 1's story also aged badly.

Reason 4: Competitive Battling
Psychic types were terribly overpowered. It was immune to Ghost in this game, which means only Bug type moves are super effective. What are the strongest Bug type moves? Pin Missle and Twineedle.

Twineedle is exclusive to Beedrill who is a Poison Type with awful stats rivaling the likes of Gloom.

That leaves Jolteon with his mediocre 65 Attack.

Also no Special split made things worse now that Alakazam's a Special wall.
With no Physical/Special split, your Hitmonchan's Ice Punch kind of sucks. Also Flareon is worse off than he already is.


In conclusion, Generation 1 was a game which aged badly and is worthy of being called the worst Pokemon Generation.
Sources:


http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...

http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...(type)

http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...

http://en.wikipedia.org...

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Phoenix61397

Con

I thank the pro for his opening argument. However, Pokemon Generation 1 is not the worst generation at all. Here's why:

1) Design
Generation 1 contains Pokemon designs that are rooted in nature and simplistic. People fell in love with the designs of Pokemon such as Pikachu and Squirtle, who are similar to biological animals that are considered cute. People can identify with these designs, and other designs such as Charizard, who was structured from popular myths about dragons. These original Pokemon appeal more to a wider range of people. As the Pokemon generations have progressed, Pokemon designs have deviated more from this biological standard and branched into a more anime-driven design. This is a less challenging avenue for artists, who just can make up almost anything they feel like instead of adhering to biological standards of what living creatures should look like. This makes the Pokemon of newer generations, especially the two latest ones, less believable. Anime also has a limited appeal, meaning less people appreciate the designs of newer Pokemon. Some weird ones include "Garbodor", a misshapen pile of who knows what, and "Aegislash", basically a sword and shield. Some newer legendary Pokemon such as Reshiram and Zekrom seem to be a contest of how many minute details can be added to a Pokemon. This changes the originally intended design style of Pokemon for the worse.
[http://www.pokemondungeon.net...]

2) Popularity

The original Pokemon of Generation 1 and the games of generation 1 are more popular. If follow the trend from bottom to top of this fan-voted list, you can see that the Pokemon become increasingly older. The top five Pokemon all belong to generation 1, as do seven of the top ten, where most of the bottom of the list is populated by newer Pokemon. [http://www.dorkly.com...]
The first generation of Pokemon games also has sold the most games to date, with about 10 million units more sold than any other generation other than generation 2, which it has outsold by about 3 million units. [http://vgsales.wikia.com...]
This does not even include firered and leafgreen, which can be counted as generation 1 games as they are remakes of the original games, red and blue.

3) Originality and Simplicity

The thing that makes generation one so good, and definitely not the worst Pokemon generation (which, I remind the voters, is all I have to prove) is that it is the essence of Pokemon. It sold everyone on the now multibillion dollar corporation that is Pokemon. Without this generation, there could be no other generations. It contains a simplistic plot that engrossed gamers without confusing, added information. Its simplicity is a strength rather than a detriment. Its original 151 Pokemon would set the precedent for all other Pokemon. It cannot be considered the worst Pokemon game. I cannot rebut my opponent's faulty arguments yet, so I will end with a source that testifies to this exact feeling of originality. [http://www.ign.com...]

Sorry for the late post. Good luck!
Debate Round No. 2
Cutiepuffle

Pro

First, a few rebuttals.

This does not even include firered and leafgreen, which can be counted as generation 1 games as they are remakes of the original games, red and blue.

http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...
FireRed and LeafGreen are Generation 3 games.

Without this generation, there could be no other generations.

If Gen 2 took it's place as first, would things be worse? You're not arguing for the game there, but merely the spot it claims as the first game.

Some weird ones include "Garbodor", a misshapen pile of who knows what, and "Aegislash", basically a sword and shield.

Some other weird ones include Muk, a misshapen pile of who knows what, and Magneton, basically 3 magnets glued together.

This is a less challenging avenue for artists, who just can make up almost anything they feel like instead of adhering to biological standards of what living creatures should look like.

But it is a more creative avenue. Who wants to see regular animals over and over again? This adds more possiblilities, leading to Pokemon for people of all tastes. Also, even though they can add more things, it still resembles it's source object while being creative.

Spr 5b 523.png
Zebstrika, while still resembling a zebra, has volt patterns as stripes to make it more interesting, while still a zebra.

This makes the Pokemon of newer generations, especially the two latest ones, less believable.
Since when was Pokemon believable?

It contains a simplistic plot that engrossed gamers without confusing, added information.
The fun gameplay was what attracted gamers, not it's simple plot. The plot is like dessert. And in Gen 1, we got the main meal, but no dessert. The plot is not awful, but inferior to others. The other games may have not had a grand plot the game revolved around, but it was a nice extra touch this generation lacked.



I believe Generation 1 felt like a rough draft, a template for the rest of the Pokemon games. Yes, I understand it is the earliest and this will happen, but we are comparing games side by side, so time doesn't matter.


Reason 5: Technical Issues
Critical hits were based off of Speed, so Pokemon like Alakazam got even more OP. Focus Energy cuts your critical hit ratio. Hyper Beam is OP, because if you kill your opponent, you don't have to recharge. Anyone remember Wrap? It's pretty annoying to play with these problems.

Reason 6: Simply Outclassed
Generation 1 were great games for their time, but GameFreak's recent Pokemon games have shown how badly it has aged. Gen 1 was simply outclassed by the others. Gen 2 beat it in gameplay. Gen 3 had a unique idea of conflicting teams, and is ideal for Pokemon hacks. Generation 4 had great villains and a wonderful region. Generation 5's ending and admittedly, Pokemon were great. Generation 6 was just fun and abounded in multiplayer features. What Gen 1 had was in the remakes, (which was Gen 3) except made better. The other games took what Gen 1 had and built on it. Would you have a random piece of nice building stone during 1995, or a house built using that stone along with new good building stones stones in 2009? Yes, 1995 had the stone first, but 2009 took that stone and built on to it while still keeping it stone. Pokemon Platinum is a Pokemon game, nonetheless. It has a simple, easy to follow plot and great gameplay, but adds new things while still keeping Pokemon at the core.

Sources:
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...(move)
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...(move)
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...

Phoenix61397

Con

I'm really sorry I haven't had time to post much of an argument, I have been pretty busy this week.

Following the rules of the debate, I can now refute my opponent's second round arguments.

1) "The Pokemon the games are terribly unoriginal."

I think the opponent meant to say the pokemon in the games are terribly unoriginal. This is untrue. This game was the first pokemon game, and no pokemon created had any precedent in a previous game. Every single Pokemon was completely original to generation 1. Sure, Grimer is a pile of sludge. It is a pile of sludge that represents human pollution of the environment. [http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net...] It set the precedent for poison pokemon and pokemon that would later be based from human pollution. Many poison pokemon in subsequent games followed its example(I.e. Garbodor, who is a pile of...something, also representing pollution).

2) "Yes, I know these games came out the earliest,and have a good reason for being this way, but since we're comparing games side by side, no matter the release date, Generation 1's graphics were horrible compared to the rest."

Graphics have no relevance to the argument. Generation 1 games were made far earlier than generation 4, which my opponent referenced, albeit with a picture, something he claimed he would rather not see in the argument. Yet a trend shows most things that were made earlier seem to be more popular. The original Parent Trap movie of 1971 [http://www.imdb.com...] scored higher on IMDB reviews than its 1998 remake http://www.imdb.com... despite worse technology. That's because its content was superior. The Beatles are considered the #1 music artist of all time by Rolling Stone, yet they had nowhere near the recording technology of today[http://www.rollingstone.com...]. The content of a piece of entertainment far outweighs any technological disadvantages. They barely matter. Generation 1 also got its graphics improved in firered and leafgreen. These are considered to be generation 3 games because of an expanded pokedex and an ability tyrade with other generation 3 games, yet in form and function they were generation 1 games, updated to fix the bugs and graphics of the original games.

3) "The storyline is catch all Pokemon and beat the champion. Oh yeah, Team Rocket does random crap too. Once again, I know this was the first game and was a bit of a rough draft, but compared to Ruby and Sapphire's conflicting teams, Sinnoh's lore, and Black and White's ending, you can see it's story also aged badly."

My opponent must know that just because a Wikipedia summary of a game is longer does not mean it has a better plot. This doesn't make sense, as Wikipedia is a site that can be edited by all kinds of people. Different people probably wrote each article. One may have been an avid writer and loved poring over the details of a game. The other may have just wanted to stick to the basics. Simplicity, in the case of Pokemon games, is not a bad thing. Pokemon are primarily children's games. Overly complicating the plot can lead to alienation of the biggest consumer of the Pokemon product. This is increasingly becoming a problem. The original games were what the consumers fell in love with.

Reason 4: "Competitive Battling"

Sure, the original games had a few glitches. Most games in a first edition do. For instance, the Elder Scrolls: Skyrim was very glitchy. [http://www.uesp.net...] Sure, it takes a little away from the gameplay, but it doesn't make the game bad. Skyrim received a 9.5/10 from gameinformer despite its glitches. http://www.gameinformer.com...
These glitches and mistakes in generation 1, though not harmful to the overall game, were fixed in firered and leafgreen. They did not detract from the game's quality.

In conclusion, my opponent has not refuted that generation 1 and it's Pokemon were more popular than any other generation. They set a precedent for other generations. They were not bad, or worse than any other Pokemon game. Thank you, and back to you.
Debate Round No. 3
Cutiepuffle

Pro

I would like to re-rebut some of these claims.

. The original Parent Trap movie of 1971 [http://www.imdb.com......] scored higher on IMDB reviews than its 1998 remake http://www.imdb.com...... despite worse technology. That's because its content was superior.

Yes, but as you have stated, it was most likely because of superior content. The people didn't like it better because it's technology was worse. I am just pointing out one way these games were inferior.


These are considered to be generation 3 games because of an expanded pokedex and an ability tyrade with other generation 3 games, yet in form and function they were generation 1 games, updated to fix the bugs and graphics of the original games.

And they are still Generation 3 nonetheless. Generation 3 took what Generation 1 had and improved it. Because of what Generation 3 had in the remakes, Generation 1 loses some of it's value.

The content of a piece of entertainment far outweighs any technological disadvantages.
Yes, but the disadvantages exist nonetheless. If this was my entire reason, then there'd be a problem. But this is only one reason.

These glitches and mistakes in generation 1, though not harmful to the overall game,
These glitches majorly affect battling. You could have trouble getting through the Celadon Gym because of the Wrap issue. All of Sabrina's Pokemon in Yellow were Level 50, compared to the Gym Trainers' Pokemon in the 30's. Put that on top of Psychic type's incredible stats and one weakness, and on top of that, the fact that they're ALL members of the Abra line. Sabrina was not just challenging, she was ridiculously overpowered.


This doesn't make sense, as Wikipedia is a site that can be edited by all kinds of people.
Is there anything wrong in the Wikipedia article I showed? Was there issues? The Internet can be edited by all kinds of people, but we use it. I actually read and fact checked the article to see if it was right.


Simplicity, in the case of Pokemon games, is not a bad thing.
I agree. But it is better if you can add more to it, while still keeping it Pokemon. That's what the new games have done. They added plots, not overly complicated ones, while still focusing on the main goal of being a Pokemon Champion. They've added something new which can please audiences.

Pokemon are primarily children's games. Overly complicating the plot can lead to alienation of the biggest consumer of the Pokemon product. This is increasingly becoming a problem.
When has Pokemon had a confusing plot? Please give an example. People who don't like it mash A, but still like the games nonetheless.

The original games were what the consumers fell in love with.
And they fell in love with the newer games too. Gen 2 is the overall fan favorite, Gen 3 is gaining momentum, and Gen 5 is heavily praised for it's story.

Here is a picture of a gaming magazine, Famitsu, which gave Pokemon Black and white a perfect 40/40, an achievement only 21 other games pulled off.


ssss

(Hard to see, but Pokemon Black and White is third to right.)

Argument 7: Replayability
After you beat the game, the most you can do is fight Mewtwo. Then you move onto another game. Yes, you could battle friends and fill the Pokedex, but that's the same for every Pokemon game. It was so bad, that in Gen 3, they had to make the Sevii Isles. You should still be able to play more after the main game is over.
Phoenix61397

Con

Phoenix61397 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Cutiepuffle

Pro

I understand my opponent is busy, so there's not much to rebut.

Graphics have no relevance to the argument.
Graphics may not have utmost relevance, but you cannot deny it has no relevance. If I said graphics alone is what made it worse, you may have a point. But this is among many other reasons including inferior content, which you said was important.

One may have been an avid writer and loved poring over the details of a game. The other may have just wanted to stick to the basics.

But you cannot deny the facts. Generation 4 had a better plot than Generation 1.

Overall, Red, Blue, and Yellow were good games. I will not deny that. However it was the limitations at the time in graphics and data what made it weaker than the rest. Game Freak made the excellence or these first games and built onto it without making it too confusing. They added newer, more original Pokemon to appeal to more audiences, while still making it down to Earth. They brought back old Gen 1 Pokemon for the people who enjoyed the Pokemon. They took what Gen 1 had and built on it. They made it better. Generation 3 and arguably 4's remakes captured Generation 1's essence of simplicity, leaving it with nothing special. The glitches in this game heavily affected the battle system. It was short, had limited multiplayer, barely an aftergame, and cannot compete with the rest. The story was weaker than the rest. A story can be successfuly implemented to Pokemon. Look at Platinum. It had a good simple story, but had battling and catching Pokemon the central point. GameFreak's excellence in making the later games led this game to age badly. When comparing games side by side, when it came out and the limits of the time is not a viable excuse. When you're trying to argue a game as better, it has to stand on its own in order to make it. This game could simply not stand the test of time and found itself weaker than the rest.
Phoenix61397

Con

I apologize to my opponent, as unforeseen circumstances have given me almost no time to participate in this debate. I beg voters to give my opponent the win, as I really have no time to argue this. Again, really sorry. I would like to debate this again later when I have time. Thanks!
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Cutiepuffle 3 years ago
Cutiepuffle
I am comparing games side by side. I am trying to show it aged badly, so graphics is an acceptable reason.
Posted by iOS 3 years ago
iOS
Pro, you cant compare graphics from two games that were made in a vast difference of time.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by baus 3 years ago
baus
CutiepufflePhoenix61397Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Openly forfeited by Con.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
CutiepufflePhoenix61397Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture