This is the number 2. It comes right after the number 1, like a sequel. To help illustrate how this works, let's look at Back to the Future Part II. It was the sequel to the original Back to the Future. We start with the first installment and then move on to the sequel. We go in order: One, two, three, and so on so forth. Now, don't get me wrong, I trust that you know how to count, but apparently Nintendo needs a refresher, because they decided to release Pokémon XD: Gale of Darkness on Nintendo Switch Online before Pokémon Colosseum. The only way this makes sense is if Nintendo forgot how to count. Or maybe they forgot that they already announced that Colosseum is headed to the Nintendo Classics app. Either way, I decided to flip through the pages of Electronic Gaming Monthly, Game Informer, Nintendo Power and more classic magazines to see what the critics said about Gale of Darkness back when it first came out. This is Nintendo Classics Review Crew!


Before we can dive into Gale of Darkness, we first need to talk about the 2003 game Pokémon Colosseum. Instead of simply being another half-baked Stadium entry, this GameCube installment was a full 3D role-playing game experience, complete with a darker story and a more grounded atmosphere. This led to the 2005 sequel, Pokémon XD: Gale of Darkness, which expands on the world and lore that was set up in the earlier title. While the first game was darker and aimed at a slightly older audience, this sequel feels more in line with the rest of the Pokémon games. It's brighter, more colorful and you're back to playing a generic wiz kid with some shiny new tech. This time around, the hero is on a mission to rescue Professor Krane after being kidnapped by Cipher agents. This leads to a whole conspiracy featuring a brand-new villain and a mystery you'll need to solve. Let's see if the critics like the dramatic shift in tone and adventure.

When it comes to Electronic Gaming Monthly, the critics liked this version of Pokemon a little bit more. They gave XD a score of 6.7 out of 10, up slightly over the 6.3 out of 10 they gave Colosseum. Shane gave it the lower score, making this depressing discovery: “Strange but true, Pokemon only seems to really work on Game Boy. Previous attempts to re-create the gotta-catch-‘em-all magic on home consoles have faltered, and Gale of Darkness succeeds only barely. Unlike the limited Pokemon Stadium and Colosseum games, Gale manages to play like the traditional handheld RPG, albeit in streamlined, dumbed-down form. Linear to a fault, this game rarely allows you to feel like a true Pokemon trainer.” Richard liked it a little bit more, concluding that “before even playing Pokemon XD, I was gulping down my hate-orade. Its plain graphics, cheesy songs and prehistoric battle system that resembles a rock-paper-scissors game made me believe that Pokemon was only for kids who didn't know what a real RPG was. But after playing 60+ hours of this beast, I became engrossed with capturing every shadow Pokemon and was muttering, ‘gotta catch ‘em all.' The battle system is surprisingly complex – if you're unfamiliar with the Pokedex, you will get your butt handed to you. The story is a definite improvement over Colosseum's, but the short ending is a tad disappointing.”

While EGM may have preferred Gale of Darkness over Colosseum, the same cannot be said about the other magazines. In fact, most strongly preferred the last game over this. Game Informer went from a 7 all the way down to a 5.75 out of 10, Colosseum's lowest score from any English-language magazine. “While the battle system is the same as the series has always been, the limited focus of collecting and rejuvenating Shadow Pokemon lessens the feel of creating your own team to tackle the challenge at hand. Instead, there is substantially more handholding in every facet of the game's journey. To be blunt, I've played a bunch of these games, and I don't need the freaking babysitting. It looks like crap. It plays like a crippled puppy – damn cute, but requiring constant and mind-numbing repetition.”

If you're looking for the highest score, then that's going to take us to NGC magazine, which gave XD a score of 86%. However, instead of focusing on that, I instead want to check in with Nintendo Power. When they reviewed Colosseum, they gave it a stellar 4.7 out of 5. Unfortunately, the sequel does not stack up. Giving Gale of Darkness an 8.5 out of 10, they noted that “XD also reuses a lot of the locations from Colosseum, and even though they look better than they did, veterans of the first GameCube offering will be disappointed with the lack of new areas to expore. It would have been nice to see more, more importantly, be able to play more new Pokemon. Outside of the story mode though, the game still has a lot of value. With the phenomenal graphics and custom rule sets, XD provides a perfect environment for battling friends. It's a little bit of a let down that, just like in Colosseum, you have to beat the story mode before you can import Pokemon from the GBA Pokemon games. Fortunately, the story mode is fun enough that it's worth the wait.”

Is it? I mean, didn't one of the reviews specifically mention the 60+ hour adventure. That's a long time to wait just to play with your friends. Either way, Pokemon XD was definitely polarizing. It earned an overall average of just 74%, which may or may not be higher than Colosseum. We would know for sure if Nintendo had released these games in the correct order (like they should have). I guess we'll have to wait until they release the original Colosseum to find out how it compares to the sequel, which makes absolutely no sense. What are we even doing here??