So, do we know exactly what happened? What was the reason behind this? Was it just to shill the GC games or were those created after realizing the mess this thing caused?
>>24922800
Limitations in technology
>>24922800
The excuse they give is hardware limitations, but they could have done something. I think they just didn't realize what a bone headed move removing connectivity was.
>>24922800
The data structures for those games are fundamentally different between the two games.
>>24922809
>>24922819
>>24922866
I still believe they could have done something about it. Well too bad, it caused a real mess, but tweaking it would have also probably prevented R/S/E from being the fundamentally different games that they were.
in terms of software it should be doable. I don't know about hardware though.
>IVs change from values between 0 and 15 to between 0 and 31
>DV system gets replaced by EV system
>certain traits like gender, shiny or not shiny, etc. no longer tied to IVs but have independent values
>transferring pokemon from one game to the other on one GBA would require internal storage in the GBA, so wasn't possible
>transferring from a GB/GBC/GBP/GBL to the GBA would require the production of a new link cable that can connect the GBA's new AGB-005 port to one/all of the different ports used by previous Gameboys
>this cable would likely have no useful application outside of pokemon
Answer: Because it would require far more work than they thought was worth it.
So that decades later it could be used as a plot device in Super Eevee Edition.
>>24922800
GBA carts are way smaller than GBC. There's no way the data would fit.
>>24922873
They literally couldn't.
On top of half the mechanics working differently between games, you also got shit like glitched pokemon passing through.
because the link cable wouldnt fit??? idiots
>>24922886
This is pretty much it.
Possible? Yes.
Worth it? Probably Not.
Software wise it's not really a problem converting IVs/Evs/Genders/Nicknames etc to the 3rd gen format, but somewhere in development they decided to drop it for one reason or another.
>>24922873
>I still believe they could have done something about it.
Technically-wise? yes.
But with GF being incompetent? no.
Dragon Quest Monsters could do it.; They've literally no excuse..
>>24922886
>this cable would likely have no useful application outside of pokemon
Hard to buy these days.
I think the connectivity break was worth it in the long-run to prevent hacked mons though, something they clearly tried again with the pentagons.
>>24924699
Let me be clearer: hard to buy that for an excuse, that is.
Trading back to gen 2 also wouldn't be possible from the softwares point of view
>>24924716
Didn't stop them going from Gen 3 to Gen 4.
>>24924742
...yeah? That's completely different
>>24924135
>Possible
I'm going to be that one faggot and ask, how?
No, really. How would you translate 0 - 15 IVs to a 0 - 31 scale?
Or how about pulling a PID out from nowhere upon transfer?
And then you have DVs. You couldn't translate those over to the modern EV system, not when they went by completely different values and could be applied to all stats.
There would be no actual data transfer at this point. Just the game shitting out a Pokemon with the same ID and name. It wouldn't be your gen I/II bro.
The real problem would be one of balance.
Rapid Spin Golem?
Reversal Gyarados?
Curse on everything?
>>24924785
not the guy but you can just double the DVs and IVs from gen 2, and make shiny and gender checks during transfer to properly set the flags in gen 3. Nature would probably be set to random.
The only problem is transfering would only work from gen2 to gen3 and not vice verca which means no trading
I understand that because of the IV system upgrade there would be issues, but surely they could have just randomized the IVs when the Pokemon reached the gen 3 games and made it a one-way trade. Of course your Pokemon could have gotten fucked over but I don't think kids would have cared that much.
>>24924819
Just add a flag stating that it was generated in Gen 3 and only allow those in competitions. :^)
>>24924699
>I think the connectivity break was worth it in the long-run to prevent hacked mons though, something they clearly tried again with the pentagons.
What do you mean? You could easily create hacked pokemon with action replay the moment the games came out.
>get a feature that didn't have to be done
>get mad when they don't get it as if they are entitled for games to do this.
I honestly think we're overdue for another nontransfer gen. Rampant complexity and coverage moves over the years have made the game hard to balance; it'd be nice if we had a nice, neat "return to basics" gen in terms of battles. Hell, pre-bank XY was one of the most fun metagames ever, even with the shadows of MegaKanga and Clawfire looming over it.
if ProjectPokemon has program that can convert Gen2 mons to Gen3, there is no real excuse why it wasn't done officially.
>>24925686
Because ProjectPokemon isn't done on a gameboy cartridge, it's done on a computer.
>>24922886
>create an external device which has external storage and links the GBC games to GBA games
>have the process convert 0-15 to 0-31 for IVs, old IV of 2 would be a new IV of 4 etc
>delete all DVs
>generate a personality value which retains gender and shiny status
SO
HARD
>>24924699
The only time EVER that the games couldn't be hacked by everyone on Day 1 was XY.
>>24924821
>Double the DVs and IVs
That would be an awful idea. Anyone who'd have a 15 would notice a slight drop in stats on their transferred mons.
And gen II EVs don't work that way. You realize the cap for each stat was something like 60k+, right? And again, they could be invested 100% in every stat.
You could change this upon transfer. You could change a lot to meet gen 3's system. But it would have meant changing so much it wouldn't be your bro anymore. And to top it all off, a lot of players would be asking why the hell their stats changed so much. The average gen 3 player was not aware of all these hidden values.
