COGA: Gen 1 - The Forgotten Foundation

[Commander]

So hello and welcome! You are probably wondering what this is. In my Pokemon Rejuvenation playthrough I played the game very differently than most people as instead of a focus on beating up and showing off my skills against the leaders, I actually focus more on the game as a whole having screencaps of huge sections of the plot. One of the most famed things is my rants where I go off on some incident or writing sin I see in Rejuv. Occasionally talk about other games, usually outside of Pokemon. This is a little bit different as I want to take on something in a more positive tone focusing on stuff that normally doesn't get talked about or often gets glanced over. I'm never going to do something generic such as "How to make a good character" as that's just written instructions and not something for people to think or talk about. I put opinionated in the acronym as these are my views or ideals and not everyone is or should agree with everything I say. If you disagree with them, I strongly encourage to speak out as it helps people broaden their horizons. Now let's kick this thing off with a bang!

 

Commander's Opinionated Gaming Articles

Pokemon's 1st Generation - The Forgotten Foundation

 

I remember when I was around the age of five, I began discovering the beauty of video games. I didn't really enjoy them as the ones I had did not suit my tastes. When I was five, I knew I was a jrpg gamer as the only game in my five game collection that I connected with was Pokemon Blue on the Game Boy Color. Funny how I only got to Brock until a year later when I finally became the champion. I'd consider Gen V the best Gen in the franchise, but now that I look back, Gen I is my favorite and while the nostalgia talking, it's those experiences that keep me as a Pokemon fan. I understand why people could say Gen I is terrible to today's standards or that it's the worst generation, but maybe after reading this article many of you will have a different perspective on the origins of Pokemon.

 

I'll start out by explaining what games were like back then. Video games were viewed by parents as being a sin or evil contraption so parents were against buying them for kids. Most games were designed for short sessions as well due to technology. I know around the N64 and PS era they were getting quite popular with Nintendo being the kid friendly console and the one parents jumped to. Most game I had were action or platformers based off popular shows and such which...actually weren't that bad. Most of them were a "get game over and start from the beginning again." I can't remember too much about the games as we had very little play time. I do remember when I got Pokemon Blue Version. Little me loved it since I didn't have to worry about dodging hazards and pits to keep playing. My fondest memory of my first journey wasn't getting my first mon, wasn't meeting and fighting Gary, nor was it catching that Pidgey. We have to forward a little bit to a little place called Viridian Forest.

 

As a five year old, I was overwhelmed when I saw I could go three different ways and had no idea which way to go. I went right and somehow made a loop back to the beginning. Over time I figured it out and on repeated playthroughs I love figuring out the best way to get all the stuff and fight all the trainers (and to this day I still believe the isolated patch of grass directly to the left of the field is the only place to catch Pikachu). Nobody told me anything about it or gave me directions through. I breathed a sigh of relief when I finally made it to the end. When I reached Pewter City, I didn't know much about it so I walked around a bit until a guy told me about a gym leader and showed me the gym. It was then and there my journey as trainer stopped as a man named Brock destroyed me time and time again until I gave up.

 

I could see why people wouldn't like Gen I due to its story, but it's a game designed around the fact it doesn't have a story. It works quite well. The game only forces two tutorials: how to catch a Pokemon and battle a gym leader. The rest of the game pretty much is you going on an adventure and exploring new places. Viridian Forest is actually a tutorial of how the game works. You have many different paths that eventually lead to the same destination. You can choose to go to a linear path by the number routes, or you can simply and see if any new places opened up. If you removed Pokemon Reborn's plot, I feel it recaptured this sense of Gen I perfectly even if you do not enjoy bits an pieces of it (who actually likes riding upwards through cycling road).

 

This is a really old RPG mechanic that dates back way, way, way before video games were a thing from a little thing called DnD as your adventure changed based on your choices and no session was ever the same. Now we jump into modern day where I want to talk about Gen VII for a minute. I just barely got past the first island in Pokemon Sun before I just stopped playing. The game had some charm, but honestly I felt it was just not very good if I could get that far into the game and not enjoy it. You go through three hours of tutorials and on the second island they still find ways to block you off. I want to say the first island had 10 or so road blocks stopping you from progressing. Gen I had two road blocks from the start all the way to Misty. If I actually counted all the roadblocks on the first island of Gen VII, I'd probably be undershooting it. The freedom to explore is a very important element in game design and it feels like it has been neglected more and more over the years and it's not just with Pokemon either.

 

Now I want to talk about gym leaders. I want you to take a moment and think of as many of the original Kanto leaders you can think of. Now I want you to think of as many of the Unovan leader. This is an assumption, but you probably thought of the first three Kanto leaders before you thought of the names of the first gym leader(s). The real kicker is that the Unovan leaders are more fleshed out characters than the Kanto ones. Heck, all but one gym leader in Kanto are not even relevant to the game's plot which you don't meet any of them outside the gym...except one. Something Gen I did was rarely have gym leaders drive progression forward. I believe you could even do events out of order. Misty was a tough gym leader and you were supposed to go through Nugget Bridge to be strong enough to face her. There was no man outside her gym stopping you so you could defeat her before even meeting Bill. I also believe you could fight the rival twice before being forced to challenge her in order to reach Surge. You can even explore Rock Tunnel without flash. I don't even think you had to face Koga until Victory Road.

 

So why on earth are gyms that could be easily skipped so remembered? Their characters didn't need development nor much screentime to give insight to their character. Surge was an army veteran which we haven't seen anything regarding this since. Brock was a shirtless guy with that Onix. These small little things left such an impact onto us it's why you can recall these people. Outside of Gen I, I feel the leaders who have small quirks or little things to them that really stick out and are remembered, but it won't work as well on post-gen I since we were expecting it or take it for granite. It's the more relatable ones like Flannery or Norman who are remembered. Now you're probably thinking: what does this stuff relate to fan-games? And I'm about to give you your answer.

 

I understand linear paths and designs are a necessary evil as non-linear designs take much, much more time to develop. My issue is regarding the increased importance of gym leaders since Gen V came out. Pokemon, at its core, is about the player going on an adventure and immerse themselves in the world. Reborn styled games do the complete opposite. Actually, I could group a large amount of Pokemon games for doing this. Leaders in these games are anything but just someone who was given a job to test and train trainers. Many of them are involved in the plot on numerous occasions. They sometimes even team up with you to stop the big bad. Most are also regarded in high authority and take action when issues arise.

 

I definitely could understand why a writer may think it is important for gym leaders to be relevant and incorporated into the plot, but we go back to the Gen V vs Gen I argument before. It does not make the leader a better character. Making gym leader active in the game's plot may actually be hurting more than helping. This goes back to the repeated cycle that Pokemon is about "A player going on a journey." I feel this process is lost as there's always a character around driving you one way or another or telling you what you need to do. Often the segment you're in is about them leading into a gym battle with them in order to progress and learn about another leader. I sometimes have wondered if the protag was even relevant at points as all they were there for was to beat someone in a Pokemon battle before another character and the villain act upon each other trying to defeat each other sometimes in a battle of wits.

 

This brings up the blame that this is the fact that it's a silent protagonist why they are irrelevant. I want to remove this from the equation as a silent protagonist in a group could be very relevant, but it requires tactical writing. Some games like Persona do it by giving you choices to be able to use your voice throughout the game without forcing a certain personality onto the protag. Others like the Paper Mario series have Mario use expressions and emotions (which Golden Sun you get to choose them) to feel more alive. The best method would be to move the perspective back to the player and not the conflict. In other words, make it so the player has to act in a scene instead of a focus on building the characters. The best way to do this is to remove gym leaders from the plot. I am not saying that gym leaders can't be active in the plot, but I'm merely saying don't include them there because they are a gym leader. I can think of numerous side characters who were memorable and fleshed out who never appeared in the main plot scenarios. That reduces the amount of characters you need to use and focus on. You also open up a window for more freedom and design of how the fan-game will work.

 

Actually, could you just picture a Pokemon game where you never had to face a single gym leader until the very end of the game? Having the first gym leader use level 40s when your team is level 20s could just add a layer of exploration and discussion. The game also wouldn't be about defeating a gym leader to get past a segment but like most RPGs defeating a boss to progress forward. Maybe when you get to a town, Ho-oh has gone crazy and is attacking and burned down a couple houses arrived. With gym leader relevance: you gotta beat a guy to even climb the mountain to face it or have to face it, then defeat the gym leader to get to the next town. Without their relevance: you'd be climbing up the mountain ASAP due to the urgency to help these people. The gym could be locked, but it wouldn't stop you from adventuring forward after defeating the Ho-oh since that event is what progresses the story. Actually no, that's not a good enough example to understand this. I need to give a scenario.

 

Scenario: An evil time has an Ice Artifact that they plan to use freeze a temple which many call their home

 

Case 1: You make contact with a girl outside who tells you that they need to stop this group in order to save her home and her people. You continue forward in which you have another conversation mid-way through where the girl wonders what has happened to the civilians where she thrusts a guy up to a wall to tell her. The man responds that they were ordered to escort all civilians outside the temple from harm's way by his boss's orders and begs for her to let go. She does but threatens she would not be so friendly to his co-workers if a single wound had been caused by one of them. The two of you then make it to the top in which the leader and girl get into an argument. The leader tries to explain that what they're trying to do is for the good of all man-kind, but the girl interrupts calling them out on their lies forcing you into a battle. Afterwards, they retreat in which the leader drops a contact card which the girl picks up. The girl then thanks you saying that she'll be ready to battle you on the first floor for a gym battle.

 

Case 2: The player has heard from the village elder outside that her people have been booted out of the temple. The player then explores and battles grunts of the evil team one of which is having an argument with a civilian. The player can intervene in which the civilian thanks them and serves as a healing spot for protecting him. When the player reaches the top, they meet the evil team leader who sees that you may be reasoned with unlike everyone else. She explains that what they're trying to do is create a special field in order to draw out Kyurem who has been terrorizing and freezing people to death in their nearby village. She then asks if you still wish to stop them. If you answer yes, you are forced to battle her in which she flees dropping a key card. If you choose no, she thanks you for understanding, but when she attempts it, it's a dud. While the plan failed, she is glad you understand their goal and gives you a card and how to find their base if they ever need anything from them or wish to join their group. The player then can go downstairs and talk to the residents and even challenge their gym leader or just move ahead.

 

No matter which option you pick as a favorite, the same exact scene occurs with the same exact outcome with the only difference being adding one more person to the scene. The biggest difference is that the player makes the decision and not a different character. Now you can't always have the player alone as sometimes characters are needed to drive the plot or make things interesting but they should be well thought out. I guarantee that one person is going to try this and then say "These scenes aren't very good or work well since no extra character is there to respond" in which I will simply respond "Then why did you use a silent protagonist?" You can make a silent protagonist in a very good story, but it requires you to make them all the more active.

 

So Gen I had some ideas that GF stopped using or backed away from for valid reasons, but can a modern day game really used the concept of freedom and exploration and have a very solid plot? Yes it can and its name is Xenoblade Chronicles. I could name other games, but this is one that's easy to recognize (if you don't and have a Wii/Wii U, it's become really cheap on Amazon). The game does go a certain direction but there are so many paths and secrets to find. Many of the side characters also don't overstay their welcome. In fact, some games have taken inspiration from from Xenoblade as they opened up their worlds and made them with the focus of exploring and many ways to get to one destination.

 

The solo silent protagonist isn't as easy to think up of an example for. I can think of solo protagonist in RPGs who were successful, but silent is harder. Drakenguard isn't an RPG...Metroid aren't RPGs either...Dragon Quest IV might count. Someone let me know of an example of a game that isn't Pokemon as most of the ones I've come up with have party members with them. I could name plenty with the gym leader concept serving as a side thing such as Paper Mario, Tales of Symphonia, and who could forget Pokemon Colosseum.

 

As time passes, the quality of game will ever increase and do things would could not imagine, but sometimes it's important to journey back to the origins so that what made a series great isn't truly lost forever. I feel that games are pushing to make characters relevant and active to make them memorable, but Gen I showed us that you can make a memorable character even if they appear only for 10 seconds. It's not about how good or strong the plot is when it comes to Pokemon, but the journey getting there to the end. As a very famous Pokemon Professor once said:

 

"Your journey is about to unfold. A world of dreams and adventures with Pokemon awaits. Let's go!"

[Azeria]

Barring typos, this is honestly an amazingly well written article capturing the charm of the franchise just right and showing ways it can be used pretty easily by the average person. I'd love to see more of these regarding game design in general, especially knowing you've got quite an extensive knowledge regarding the subjects. Good show.

 

445.

[Zargerth]

681

 

I played trough/completed Xenoblade Chronicles not too long ago. I had a blast with that game, trying to complete as many quests as possible and searching for Unique Monsters to beat down I still haven't beaten all the super bosses though. What interests me is the notion that the Gym Leaders don't necessarily have to be the focus of a Pokemon game. Would you say they are similar to Xenoblade Chronicle's Unique Monsters in that regard? It isn't mandatory to beat them (or at least not a lot of them anyway) but you might end up fighting them during exploration or because a quest requires you to defeat a certain UM.

 

Out of the games you mention I have played Golden Sun - all 3 games - as well as Tales of Symphonia. In case of ToS, I really hadn't thought about the game the way you have. I do need some elaboration, though. Could you explain what do you mean by saying the gym leader concept is a side thing in ToS? From what I understand, you do need to enter the temples and ruins and etc. and release the seals to proceed further in the game. The seals are guarded by boss monsters that sort of serve as gym leaders of that game. Have I misunderstood what you say when I make this connection? Or do you mean to imply that these "gym leaders" don't contribute to the story all that much?

 

Anyhow, reading your article served as a nice trip back to the memory/nostalgia lane, so thank you for that.

[Neco]

@Zargerth In the case of ToS, you have a vertain flexibility in exploring the temples. While you have to do Fire first, I think, you can choose either Water (what you are meant to do, I think) or Wind second. I don't know you can change it even more, but the story can progress in different ways. Or beating Kratos when you are supposed to lose against him.

 

This is, at least, the way I understood the reference.

[Alistair]

Really good read. I agree with most of what you said about Gen 1 games, and I too don't really like how more recent games take the player by their hand and pretty much all follow the same "follow a path dictated by road blocks - beat a leader - unlock a way around the aforementioned road blocks - progress" template. This system works well within games that are story-driven like Reborn, and by that I mean driven by a good story. In canon pokémon games, where the story is generally not extraordinarily compelling compared to many RPGs out there, it tends to feel contrived. And I'm saying that as someone who has huuuge nostalgia goggles for Gens 2-4.

It wouldn't hurt to have games that rekindle the exploration and free adventuring feel Gen 1 had. This option combined with modern gameplay and technical aspects could give birth to amazing games.

 

I like one of your ideas in particular, which is making all the gym leaders strong and "forcing" (not literally, but due to difficulty levels) the player to face them only during the mid-to-late game. Gym leaders are supposed to be tough, the masters of one type each, and it is regularly emphasized in the games how respected and admired they are by the general population. That doesn't synergize well with their usual status as stepping stones for pretty much any kid who vaguely knows how to use pokémons in battle. A fangame like Reborn makes up for it by making battles difficult, so defeating a leader does feel like an achievement. Canon games can't raise the bar too high due to the demographics they're primarily aiming for, but they could instead make the leaders generally more powerful and move them to a bit later in the games. 

I think by doing that, and slightly removing leaders from the plot as you suggested, the leader figure could be 'sacralized' again to some extent, which is something I'd like to see happening. Respect the leaders, people, for they are no pushovers =p

 

Edit: 693

Edited September 1, 2017 by Alistair
well played Commander, well played

[Zargerth]

@Neco

 

Right, that would explain it. On a side note, you can also take on Kvar before Magnius.

[FairFamily]

It certainly was an interesting read and you bring up a good point. I do aggree that with each Gen the amount of roadblocks increased. The reason for this is probably the lowered difficulty curve across gaming which required a way to force people into the full extent of the game to maximize the playing time. This in my opinion backfired in gen 3 by opening the oceaan and not forcing me fully through it which means I did not fully explore missing valuable exp which resulted in a difficulty/level spike around the elite 4.

 

The argument about gym leaders is also pretty interesting and I see experimentations with the concepts you just suggested in fangames. Fangames like reborn and rejuvenation don't do this because they have heavily story driven and can't afford the bigger cast. But desolation does some experimentation with the concept by lowering their influence throughout your story. Spork is another fangame that I feel plays with the concept. Some gym leaders serve as a decoration for the world rather than a plot device. It is very interesting to see how the fangame commnity deals with these issues.

[Gentleman Jaggi]

I'm gonna have to disagree with the Kanto Leaders being more memorable characters thahn later ones; when I think about the Leaders in Yellow Version the things that come to mind are Onix's Bide, that frikken Starmie, Sabrina's Abra spamming Flash or Koga's ridiculously high-leveled Venonat horde. All of these are things that are related to gameplay, rather than the characters themselves. I played Yellow and LG countless times, because they were my first Pokémon games, but if you ask me about these characters the most you'll get is something along the lines of "Brock likes Rocks". They're not memorable as characters because, as characters, they don't do shit. They just stand in their gyms waiting for challengers. In that sense they're no different from any NPC trainer standing in a Route; it's only their supposed role in the world that's different.

The Unovan Leaders get much more screentime and, as you noted, are much more developed characters. So why are they less remembered? I say it's because we already know so many others. Brock and Co. aren't memorable for what they do or are, they're more memorable for when and how often we've seen them act out their roles. Most of us first played Pokémon as kids and most likely only had one game to start with. So we played that one over and over. It's always easier to remember Nr.1 in a long string of numbers following it and that only gets compounded when Nr.1 is also the one we're most familiar with. For most of us older fans the first games were RBY, so that's what we remember best. (It also helps that, honestly, those games are very simple so everything is easier to remember.) Let's say somebody started with the Sinnoh games, then the Leaders they'd remember the most are, I dunno, Fantina and Wake? Those two feel like they would stand out.

For me personally, I played a lot of Emerald, so the Leaders I probably remember the most out of all of them are Watson, Winona and Tate+Liza. They don't get any more characterization than the Kanto Leaders, they're just the ones that managed to stand out throughout my various playthroughs.

 

Not going to get into the whole Exploration vs Linearity thing; that's a matter of preference anyway. I'll just state that Sun/Moon really felt ridiculous with some of those NPC roadblocks.

[Commander]

On 9/1/2017 at 6:53 AM, Doug Dimmadome said:

I'd love to see more of these regarding game design in general, especially knowing you've got quite an extensive knowledge regarding the subjects.

I may actually do a bi-weekly instead of monthly since these are pretty easy to write only taking 4-6 hours. That's a very small amount of time compared to most of my projects. I'll likely go back and edit it but I didn't want to have to wait a week to make the post. I'm also going to try to talk about subjects that don't get talked about a lot or give a different spin on them. I do know what the next COGA will be.

 

On 9/1/2017 at 7:01 AM, Zargerth said:

In case of ToS, I really hadn't thought about the game the way you have. I do need some elaboration, though. Could you explain what do you mean by saying the gym leader concept is a side thing in ToS?

 

This is a bit of minor tales of symphonia spoilers but when you return to old seals you've unlocked you can get summons, however, there's no particular time you need to get them until you hit a certain point so you could either get them right away or wait until you need them. You could even not realize you missed a summon such as Maxwell. The game had many objectives but you could do certain things at certain times and occasionally get bits of dialogue stopping or you needed to go back later. Heck, a party member is dependent on a single choice. I was mostly referring to the summons quests.

 

On 9/1/2017 at 7:22 AM, Alistair said:

This system works well within games that are story-driven like Reborn, and by that I mean driven by a good story. In canon pokémon games, where the story is generally not extraordinarily compelling compared to many RPGs out there, it tends to feel contrived

I'll first state that my area of expertise is paper writing format such as novels and occasionally short stories. While I understand your argument, I have to disagree with this but mostly regarding that this works due to a good story. This system for Reborn does not work well for Reborn because of the story as Reborn's story could be regarded as both ingenious or really, really bad and both statements would be valid. From my own standing, I see it as a bad plot saved by phenomenal scenario writing. I'll leave it at that as I could make 10 or 12 articles breaking up everything regarding story to explain the reasoning behind that, but that's not what this statement is talking about.

 

I believe what you are referring to is game flow which is the ease and transition from scenes back to controlling the player. It's really hard to condense this but the best way to describe it is "an instant reaction to do or not do something." I do think Reborn manages this well and why a mixed system works for it. Flow is the most important thing when writing a story so I will cover it and cover it deeply.

 

On 9/1/2017 at 7:33 AM, FairFamily said:

The argument about gym leaders is also pretty interesting and I see experimentations with the concepts you just suggested in fangames. Fangames like reborn and rejuvenation don't do this because they have heavily story driven and can't afford the bigger cast. But desolation does some experimentation with the concept by lowering their influence throughout your story. Spork is another fangame that I feel plays with the concept. Some gym leaders serve as a decoration for the world rather than a plot device. It is very interesting to see how the fangame commnity deals with these issues.

The technique I explained is actually called trimming down the cast which I want to say every good story heavy game does...which Reborn doesn't for...reasons. Some characters who have big influence in the plot and lore could possibly be missed entirely if the player so wishes it. I've even trimmed down the cast of my characters in my own writing removing two very important character though I did bring one back over time. But that's off topic is the point is that stationary passive characters can be really in-depth and quite amazing characters:

 

 

I could name 5 very interesting facts about that character above and she is a very minor character in the story pretty much being a typical maid NPC for most games. Hell, I'd argue she's more fleshed out than Reborn's entire cast (or at least Cain levels of character...but the opposite personality). How to write big casts is very hard to explain as it involves a "less is more tactic" but Pokemon is not a good go to for comparing them.

 

On 9/3/2017 at 1:51 PM, Gentleman Jaggi said:

I'm gonna have to disagree with the Kanto Leaders being more memorable characters thahn later ones; when I think about the Leaders in Yellow Version the things that come to mind are Onix's Bide, that frikken Starmie, Sabrina's Abra spamming Flash or Koga's ridiculously high-leveled Venonat horde. All of these are things that are related to gameplay, rather than the characters themselves. I played Yellow and LG countless times, because they were my first Pokémon games, but if you ask me about these characters the most you'll get is something along the lines of "Brock likes Rocks". They're not memorable as characters because, as characters, they don't do shit. They just stand in their gyms waiting for challengers. In that sense they're no different from any NPC trainer standing in a Route; it's only their supposed role in the world that's different.

 

First, Gameplay is a very important part and role to a character and whether or not their memorable. It's like saying a boss with a cool signature attack you remember him by doesn't make him memorable. Memorable in a bad way is also a term. Gen I certainly had its flaws from its design but most information was told very passively which shows on the fame checker in Gen III. It's a style of writing they just stopped working with in Gen V making them all the more involved...like Gen V, which I'm merely saying that the passive kind of writing can work well if not better as it rakes out characters hogging the spotlight like in Reborn.

 

But when you are comparing bad and worse, it's a hard sale. But comparing Gen I does bring up the chicken and egg situation as it came out in the right place at the right time. I'm not even sure if Gen V being the first game (released in that time obviously) if Pokemon would even exist now. It'd probably be in Yo-kai Watch's situation. But if we eliminate all factors outside of characters (graphics being the same and all), I still think the Kanto leaders would be more memorable as the journey is very simplified and the small, small handful of characters really stick out due to that. It also had some really quirky dialogue like the "shorts are easy and comfortable to wear." Though I feel this will be a simple agree to disagree as Pokemon and story do not mix well together.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Sorry about the really delayed responses but I didn't have too much time to get to work on them. Anyways, I'll try doing 2 (maybe 3 sometimes) a month as it's an easy to do thing and I already know what the next COGA will be. It'll probably also be the last time I really talk about Gen I for a long, long time as it's an old and outdated game, but it is great at looking at a foundation or starting point. That's what a lot of these early topics are going to be regarding: foundations.

[Gentleman Jaggi]

@Commander If that hypothetical boss's cool signature attack is the only memorable thing, then I'd say there can't be much character behind that. There's not necessarily anything wrong with that if being a boss fight is all that's supposed to be there. I think that the difference here is that any mindless beast or machine could provide a memorable battle while an actual character can carry weight outside of a combat encounter. That brings up the issue that most Gym Leaders only get their one battle and the dialogue right before and after, so not much opportunity to build a memorable character.

You mentioned that the Leaders from Gen V on are more involved in the plot than previously, but that's really not true. The Unova Leaders in Black/White were involved, as each of them got their own short plot before the eventual gym battle, ususally involving Team Plasma. This continued with Team Plasma's attempted takeover of the League at the end of the game. It served to make the whole thing feel more connected, but that was dropped for all following games again. Neither the Unova leaders in BW2, nor the Kalos or Hoenn leaders took any action in the plot. Alola lacks Gym Leaders, but it has equivalents in the Trial Captains and Kahunas and again none of those take any action in the plot. With the exception of Black/White the various leaders have mostly received the same treatment. You enter the gym and get their pre- and post-battle dialogues. Aside from that one exception Gym Leaders have always sort of existed in their own little bubbles, separate from whichever story might or might not have been going on around them.

 

Dunno what you mean with Yokai Watch's situation. If Black/White had been the first Pokémon games to be released, then I could see the series as being a lotdifferent from how it is now. More focused on stories that actually deal with the core principle of capturing creatures to have them fight each other, potentially with a greater variety of narrative across the various games rather periodically creating more new 'Mons. (The back of my head keeps saying "Shin Megami Tensei" while I'm thinking about that.)

 

It's certainly true that the simpler nature of the Kanto games can make the things that are there stand out more, but I wouldn't count that as an overall credit for those games. If there's a lot of actors running around each individual one gets harder to pick out, but on the flipside how much does something being memorable really mean when there's nothing that could even compete against it? I think this is something where our experiences are completely different; for you that first time playing Pokémon is obviously something you still remember very well, for me it's just one playthrough among many of a game that I've basically memorized through repetition.

 

Lastly, and this may be nitpicking, "Pokémon and story do not mix well". There's nothing about the concept of Pokémon that rules out having a engaging story. At most it's the formulaic approach of "Gym Leaders + Team Whatever, then Elite 4" that would work against having a good story. And even then, Black/White already showed that the whole thing can be weaved together into something that feels connected; the limiting factor then is how many unique plots you can form out of that.

I think the two Cipher games on GameCube are a good indication of what a Pokémon game could look like if you removed that formula. You're still going around capturing Pokémon and fighting other trainers, but rather than the plot having certain "checkpoints" or Badge quotas that absolutely need to be hit you instead have a story that's (ideally) exactly as long as it needs to be.