Quoted By:
Ok, to calm nerve and stop wars, here's some pros and cons to each:
>Gen 1
Glitchy and unbalanced, but had memorable designs and pioneering features to help it stand out in the crowd. Not great today, but for the time was groundbreaking
>Gen 2
Despite a harsh difficulty spike and introducing roaming legends (seriously, fuck that noise) the features and improvements added made these games stand the test of time even better than gen 1 while still remaining relatively simple. Definitely musts for first timers
>Gen 3
For better or for worse implemented the complexity of natures and abilities into the fray, improving some pokemon and damning others. Had some generally memorable designs to make up for its shortcomings however. Also memes aside RSE did have too much water, but FRLG remakes were needed and appreciated
>Gen 4
Hit or miss roster, but the special physical split was much needed and improved the games forever. While DP had some pacing and mechanical problems (surf speed), Platinum made up for this as a great follow up, and HGSS arguably have the best post-games to this date, easily making them the most enjoyable for the longest
>Gen 5
While the roster is easily the weakest in the series, the faster gameplay and improved animation made it much more enjoyable from a mechanical standpoint, as well as including the most fleshed out story the games will likely ever have
>Gen 6
From strong to objectively weak. Despite an improved new roster and fairy added, as well as balance changes, megas split the community in two, the story was a vast step down from BW and handholding became more apparent, deterring older players. ORAS also didn't hold up to their originals nearly as much after all changes were applied. The online aspect was improved however, lending to better mass appeal, if a dip in quality (if gen5 is an acquired yet enjoyable taste, and gens1-4 are loved big brands, gen6 is more like cheap snacks)
