Are Mega Evos Here To Stay? | |||
| Yes | 42 | 100.00% | |
| Total: | 42 | ||
mZuzek said:
There's a lot of cool pokémon in generation 6. |
Yeah, there's a few. I like the entire Froakie evolution line, Sawk, and a few others. I just feel the designs are getting ceaper by the generation.
I'm sure they'll stay. Not a fan of them, but at this point I'm betting on the Mega Evos just being a gimmick that sticks around.
bet: lost
mZuzek said:
There's a lot of cool pokémon in generation 6. |
Thank you. Only around 70 new pokemon yet for the most part quality was amazing. Gen 6 designs are overall one of the top from all regions. Tbh I think gen 1 barely beats it. Opinions I know :p
Unless they introduce a mechanic that replaces or builds on it, i imgaine it will stay.
NNID: b00moscone
Switch ID: SW-5475-6755-1986
3DS friend-Code: 4613-6380-5406
PSN: b00mosconi
mZuzek said:
That's just your nostalgia. I know it sounds stupid, but it really is. Bad designs have been around since the very beginning of Pokémon, and usually the bigger a generation is, the more stupid designs it has (I guess gen 4 being the only exception to this). A lot of people complain gen 6 was too small, but I actually love it, because you can tell almost every single one of the new 72 Pokémon were very unique and had a creative idea behind them - it's no longer like in some previous gens where they made some Pokémon just for filler. I'm going to go all out on this one, through the whole roster of Kalos. The starters - A knight, a rogue and a mage. Grass/Fighting, Fire/Psychic and Water/Dark. Awesome designs. GG, Game Freak. So basically, what's there to dislike is Bunnelby, Diggersby, Binacle, Barbaracle, Klefki, Diancie, Hoopa and Volcanion. Also, Sawk is gen 5. |
Oh, yeah Sawk is BW. I was just saying him because I had him in my team. And no, It's not my nostalgia. It's my taste. I like the first 3 generations because they're based off of simple ideas, more so gen 1 and 2. I don't like most of the pokemon after gen 4 really. I just think the designs were much more appealing and simple. Now they're just trying too hard to impress and I'm not really impressed. The Legendaries look like Digimon rejects compared to the older ones. Lugia, Ho-oh, Mewtwo, Zapdos, man...they're just so cool looking. Now they're monotone one dimensional legendaries that are shoehorned into the game's story. As in the first few gens, you had to find them and track them or get caught totally off guard with only a pokeball at your disposal to catch a wild Entei. The first 150 pokemon were made with purpose and I can't say I hate any of their designs. Now...Keys, Swords, Shields, Single Scoop Ice Cream Cones, Double Scoop Ice Cream Cones, Bags of freaking trash...trash! A pokeball with arms, with arms!
I also like the older gens because the legendaries had lore that was explained and it was interesting. Now, it seems like every new game there has to be a Pokemon that was "the creator" or "the first Pokemon" or "A pokemon that can beat Magic Johnson in 1v1 game of 21". It's my opinions. The newer pokemon aren't that good and lack the essense that the first 3-4 gens had. They're beginning to look much more mechanical in structure, rather than organic, which is okay for some types and ideas but it's like all of them do it now.
They'll stay exactly the same. They are literally just alternate formes. I mean, who knows if he'll keep making new ones after sun and moon, but they are most definitely staying and remaining untouched conceptually. There's absolutely no reason to change them.
mZuzek said:
There's a lot of cool pokémon in generation 6. |
This one screams Gen 1, which is the internets favorite gen. Ingenious in it's simplicity - and adorable and awesome.
| mZuzek said: Well I guess I just expanded on that a little bit. What I forgot to say though, is that not only do I like gen 6 for being quality above quantity, but I also kinda like a small quantity on its own already, because at this point in time, I don't want to keep getting like 140 new Pokémon every 3 years and end up with an endless roster too soon. There already 721 - this is the time to start slowing the pace down. |
Did you just reference the "too many Pokemon" topic?
I'll pray for you.
"You should be banned. Youre clearly flaming the president and even his brother who you know nothing about. Dont be such a partisan hack"
| mZuzek said: That's just your nostalgia. I know it sounds stupid, but it really is. Bad designs have been around since the very beginning of Pokémon, and usually the bigger a generation is, the more stupid designs it has (I guess gen 4 being the only exception to this). A lot of people complain gen 6 was too small, but I actually love it, because you can tell almost every single one of the new 72 Pokémon were very unique and had a creative idea behind them - it's no longer like in some previous gens where they made some Pokémon just for filler. I'm going to go all out on this one, through the whole roster of Kalos. The starters - A knight, a rogue and a mage. Grass/Fighting, Fire/Psychic and Water/Dark. Awesome designs. GG, Game Freak. So basically, what's there to dislike is Bunnelby, Diggersby, Binacle, Barbaracle, Klefki, Diancie, Hoopa and Volcanion. Also, Sawk is gen 5. |
While I absolutely would check the notion that having only 72 new Pokémon was ever a good idea, and I definitely reject the idea that other Pokémon generations suffered from having a larger roster of new Pokemon, the new Pokémon that do appear in Kalos are fantastic.
And yes, that includes Klefki. The stupid aversion to Pokémon being designed after unremarkably inanimate objects has to stop. It's so silly. It's like every Pokémon has to be inspired by some obscure Lebanese god of misfortune to be considered "well designed." Same goes with the Vanillux/Trubbish line, by the way. The designs are fine.
mZuzek said:
Your post ended here. This argument has long been debunked. Let's use the same arguments for the first generation... a pokeball with eyes that evolves into an upside down pokeball with eyes. A mole that evolves into 3 moles. A magnet that evolves into 3 magnets. A whore. A mime. When it comes to trash, gen 5 had solid trash... to complete the circle after gen 1 introduced us to liquid trash and gas trash. Sigh.
This whole thing about legendaries having to be deities of some kind was indeed a big problem in generations 3 and 4. In 5 and 6, not so much... sure, they're "shoehorned" into the story, but that's to create a more meaningful story to the game and they do a good job at that. Other than the way they're brought into the story, I'd argue there's not a lot that's different between Mewtwo/Mew/Lugia/Ho-Oh and Reshiram/Zekrom/Xerneas/Yveltal. And no, the Pokémon are not starting to look mechanical in structure. Some of them do, like always - most of them don't. Stop letting your nostalgia speak, and thing, for you. |
Why is this site so deadlocked on converting people. I have reasons/opinions why I don't like certain generations. I was born in a time where there was NO pokemon or it was just being released in Japan. The pokemon now have rigid edges and aren't organic, which is why I state they look mechanical, not in appearance or composition but in the art element of line. Gen 1 did have Muk and Koffing but they were cleverly designed to make you think of what they could be. Now, it's just a pair of keys and a trash bag plain as day. Like I said, I was born in 1996 okay. The first pokemon game I played was sapphire, then diamond, I didn't even know about the first 2 gens. I had to backtrack to play the first 2 games. I have no nostalgia for the first two games. They were painful to play. But I could say that at least the monster designs were much better composed and recognizable. To me, the new designs look like nickelodeon cartoons. I'm not saying gen 6 didn't have decent pokemon, that's like saying 1990 was the only decade that had decent music. I'm just saying that In MY OPINION, they don't look as good as the first 3 or 4 gens.
The story in Pokemon games these days isn't that good anyways. It's not about story, so shoehorning a legendary just to "to create a more meaningful story to the game and they do a good job at that." isn't working that well. That Lasandre guy or however you spell his name was the lamest villain tied to legendaries in the entire series. I loved that the first games didn't give a crap about Legendaries, nor was much known about them. That, if anything adds depth to the story rather than spelling everything out to us like we're in kidnergarten like gen 5 and 6. In the first 2 games specifically, you were on a journey and by some chance you learn of legendaries. Now it's like every game, the legendary takes center stage. Pokemon never relies on a strong story, nor has it ever had one. Nor does it need one. But citing inclusions of legendaries as important plot devices isn't that cool.
mas, lots are in love with megas.
if they took my megazardx away, i gonna forget pokemon for a while.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
