>>36498459>something like Pokemon Box on the GamecubeYou would need an unique cable for GB[C] games to interface with Game Cube ones. Regular GBA link cables can't be used to connect two GBC games afterall, so the GBA-GC cable couldn't be used either. And even then, I don't know if the Game Cube itself would like the kind of communication protocol that GB games used.
>similar to how you can transfer VC stuff to Pokebank nowadaysGee, it's almost like 3DS is a much more powerful system that has full control over the emulated hardware, the game data and the save data.
Surely a GBA could have picked up a GB game and... do what exactly? Download its data to its non-existent internal memory? Transfer it to the non-existent internet services through its non-existent wi-fi chip?
>but how come that magically isn't a problem now?First, because of vastly different technology, secondly, because back then they didn't make the kind of compromises they do now, like one-way transfers.
Geez, I'm no computer expert but this notion that any toy machine can do absolutely anything is disingenous and puerile.
>>36498506The way they went at it is absolutely the worst they could do.
Resetting EVs is probably a good idea sincerecalculating them is kind of pointless but IVs should indeed have followed what you said. And natures would be better off if they were based on the stats themselves (eh, here you have an use for stat experience) rather than regular exp points.
It just makes no sense that you could have a machamp with a specially high attack only to become a wimp when trasnferred over because it got a 0 IV and a negative nature.
As for colo/XD, what is the problem with the legendaries and starters specifically? I get that most (all?) of the other missing pokémon were availiable in Kanto and the Sevii Islands, but beating the FRLG postgame isn't any less annoying than beating colo/XD.
I would mention Navel Rock, but events before gen 4 were utter bullshit.
