>>2927762
Yes, Dragon Warrior Monsters is a very legit competitor to Pokemon, and all of the remakes for the Gameboy refresh the games in such a way to make them perfectly accessible without sacrificing what makes the game what it is.

Yeah.

Probably better than the originals.

>>2927762

DO you like DQ?

>>2927762
I loved Dragon Warrior 3. And I liked Dragon Warrior Monsters a hell of a lot better than Pokemon, which I liked a lot. I never played Dragon Warrior Monsters 2 though, but always wanted to.

>>2931840
2's the only one I've played. I love it so much. I probably should go and play 1 at some point.

>>2931856
I'm sure it's good. Really need to check it out some time.

>>2927762
First game is average and the second game is the pits.

I got bored of the third game pretty early on. Supposed to be in the top 3 DQs from what I've heard from a lot of anons, but it was too much of the same of the first two games for me after just coming fresh from beating DQII. So idk about that one

>>2927762

These anons (>>2927781, >>2931840, >>2928916) are so very right by me.

If you've never played DQ, the GBC versions are a good starting point, since they're a fair bit less archaic in terms of interface. Personally, I can play the original NES versions and not be bothered by the interface, but it's nice to not have to select "Stairs" every time you see a staircase sometimes.

All a matter of preference, but I still think they're damn good remakes/ports and fine entry points. And the Monsters side series was amazing back then. Joker didn't do Monsters much good with the VIII/IX-esque skill trees.