(01-16-2013, 12:05 PM)NICKtendo DS Wrote: You'll only see flaws you want to see.
There'll always be Pokémon you like and Pokémon you hate.
Deal with it.

You see, I don't like how Xerneas looks. That's me. There'll be people that like Xerneas. That's good. Pokémon is for everyone.
But here's an idea. Why don't I just pick Pokémon Y instead of X. Yveltal looks cool. But even if he wouldn't, I still have over 700 other Pokémon to choose from.
So stop arguing about designs. It's pointless. We have over 700 Pokémon now, so did you really expect all of them to be "good", let alone meet your standards? If you tell me all first 151 designs were good, you are a big, fat liar.

Pardon me for my rudeness, but it had to be said.

People have said this before, I'm pretty sure everyone knows that there's no use in complaining about Pokemon. At this point we're all just discussing what we like and dislike. I don't think anyone expects things to change or everyone to agree. Or at least I don't.

So I see your point, and I agree, if there's a Pokemon I don't like I won't go crazy about it, I'll probably even catch it and use it if it's useful. But I just like to discuss this sort of stuff with you guys.

I never liked Mr Mime. Also as far as I remember, we all disliked Traumato - uhm, let me google this - Drowzee. I didn't like that yellow duck for a while. Tentacool... the evolution was great but that thing was awful! No need to talk about Jynx... or Magikarp.

Kriven, hush.

If you hate that Game Freak is trying to be creative with their designs, then keep your nostalgia goggles on and go fawn over generation 1. Your whining won't change anything; Game Freak is going to keep on doing what they do. Don't like Pachirisu because of its spiked tail? Don't like Seviper because of the shapes on its body? Too bad, so sad. Spheal with it.

Frankly, I like the additional details they have for Pokemon. It makes most of them stand out. I mean they're supposed to be monsters! So why not go all out with creating them? Even animals in real life have crazy designs on them. Nobody bitches about that!

(01-15-2013, 11:28 PM)alvin and shrek in: chipshrekd Wrote:

(01-15-2013, 10:26 PM)Sevenstitch Wrote: I agree

(01-15-2013, 10:13 PM)Mighty Jetaku Wrote: "I just want to say Pachirisu seriously looks like a blue, squirrel version of Pikachu."

=

just sayin'

This highlights my problem with Pachirisu. Pikachu has reasonably sized limbs; I can picture it running. Pachirisu cannot possibly propel itself along the ground unless it slowly waddles on its hind legs or it drags its massive head along the ground.

(01-16-2013, 02:49 PM)RokuGurin Wrote: Spheal with it.

The sole reason I thanked this post.

In all seriousness, really what makes me dislike certain pokemon designs is color--not sure why, but it's a big factor to me.
Like, most of the gen IV designs are interesting, but for some reason it frustrates me that so many designs have primarily cool colors. Is it just me?

I have a feeling nobody probably understands what I'm saying, but I've always been bugged by Gen IV designs despite the fact that I really love some (Roserade, Froslass, Purugly, Honchkrow, Togekiss, etc.) and never really knew why, but now I think it's because the whole gen is dominated by like a royal blue/purple oriented color scheme (Even the trees and water in the overworld). All the greens, reds and yellows that could be really flourescent and cool (like in Roserade Cherubi, Magmortar, and Lickilicky) are either dull or slightly blue tinted.
I think I liked Gen V because they started to use pure gray again rather than lots of hueshifting, but maybe I'm the only one? Any thoughts?

also i already felt like diamond and pearl were in france

now it's in france again

You know, looking at this argument now is humorously ironic. As it shows, all of us have different tastes, as some designs appeal to some, while to others.. not so much. Which is why in the transformers fandom, we have hilarious arguments such as the ever classic "TRUKK NOT MUNKY" argument or the "HAN SHOT FIRST" debate in the Star Wars fanbase. This is no different.

Same can be said for those wasted hours that were spent arguing about the perception of fancharacters and whatnot, but it's all about personal taste and prefrence. I don't like X's design, but I like Y's. Kinda funny how I use the X and Y argument frequently now these legendaries exist

(01-16-2013, 02:49 PM)RokuGurin Wrote: Kriven, hush.

If you hate that Game Freak is trying to be creative with their designs, then keep your nostalgia goggles on and go fawn over generation 1. Your whining won't change anything; Game Freak is going to keep on doing what they do. Don't like Pachirisu because of its spiked tail? Don't like Seviper because of the shapes on its body? Too bad, so sad. Spheal with it.

Frankly, I like the additional details they have for Pokemon. It makes most of them stand out. I mean they're supposed to be monsters! So why not go all out with creating them? Even animals in real life have crazy designs on them. Nobody bitches about that!

Sorry, I forgot I wasn't allowed to have opinions.

It's not that you can't have opinions, it's just you keep claiming parts of your opinions as objective fact when Gen 1 has been shown to suffer from the same problems as the later ones, as well as later Gens also carrying many of the strengths that Gen 1 had.

If you were to chalk it up to the fact that preference over Pokemon designs is an almost entirely subjective matter, instead of relying on arguments that simply don't hold up on their own, then I think we'd be a bit more okay here. I, for example, disagree greatly with people who think Gen III had crappy designs but I can see why they'd prefer other designs, and I can accept that there's people who don't think Tropius is rad as hell.

Admittedly, RokuGurin didn't exactly handle that as gracefully as he/she could have, but no one's attacking you for your opinions. They just disagree and feel that the way you're defending them is a bit... misguided.

gengar and haunter are the greatest pokemon ever shut up forever theyre untoppable

(01-16-2013, 10:12 PM)Tellis Wrote: there's people who don't think Tropius is rad as hell.

Impossible!

(01-16-2013, 10:12 PM)Tellis Wrote: It's not that you can't have opinions, it's just you keep claiming parts of your opinions as objective fact when Gen 1 has been shown to suffer from the same problems as the later ones, as well as later Gens also carrying many of the strengths that Gen 1 had.

If you were to chalk it up to the fact that preference over Pokemon designs is an almost entirely subjective matter, instead of relying on arguments that simply don't hold up on their own, then I think we'd be a bit more okay here. I, for example, disagree greatly with people who think Gen III had crappy designs but I can see why they'd prefer other designs, and I can accept that there's people who don't think Tropius is rad as hell.

Admittedly, RokuGurin didn't exactly handle that as gracefully as he/she could have, but no one's attacking you for your opinions. They just disagree and feel that the way you're defending them is a bit... misguided.

But it is an objective fact that there has been a shift in design interest between the first two generations and the past three (almost four) generations.

Whether it's good or bad or not is subjective. But that there is a difference between the two (old and new) is not.

I also don't think it really has much to do with how I word my arguments at all. It feels, to me, like preferring the older generations automatically has one labelled as "Nostalgia-sir" and dismissed as an annoyance. My opinions have been no more or less misguided than anyone else's here. I think they're being interpreted that way because people are attributing large umbrellas to my point of view that I never opened myself. There are some good designs among the newer Pokemon, I never said they were all bad. Just like I never said that all of the old ones were good. You mentioned Tropius earlier, and I think that's a pretty cool design. I think Excadrill is a pretty cool design. But on the whole I have been largely disappointed with the direction the series has taken, and as someone who was a fan of the series from the very beginning, I feel a little betrayed.

For the record, Pokemon Ruby came out ten years ago already. I was only twelve then. I have some very nostalgic memories from those early tween-teen years. Even back then I felt something was "off" about the way the Pokemon looked in RSE. My opinions are not nostalgia driven. They are solely preference.

I also think it's interesting that I'm being called out for expressing myself as being "objective" when a number of other posters have argued "creativity" as an objective point. Which it really isn't and never will be.

Starting in gen 3 the designs started getting a little more complicated, but I think that has to do more with the fact that the games could now display more color, allowing for more intricate designs. It's just how it happens. It's like comparing Mario's design to, say, Bayonetta's. Mario is simple because he's a product of the limitations. Bayonetta gets to be way more detailed because she was designed when the hardware could handle... more.

(01-16-2013, 11:00 PM)Kriven Wrote: I also think it's interesting that I'm being called out for expressing myself as being "objective" when a number of other posters have argued "creativity" as an objective point. Which it really isn't and never will be.

It's not that you shouldn't have an opinion. But what's wrong with the designs being more intricate? I've just never heard a complaint against something like this before. I usually hear complaints about the designs "sucking" or being "bad ideas", not that they're complex.

So would you rather have Pokemon continue to be stylized animals with extra features, like Tauros? I mean there are still Pokemon in later generations that have simple designs (Like Stantler, Sealeo and Ducklett). But Game Freak mixes that in with Pokemon that are extravagant in how they look.

Lemme put it this way. Which would you prefer? A bland watery soup or a soup with spices and stock in it?

Again I'm not against you having an opinion; it's just the subject of your opinion that befuddles me.

(01-16-2013, 04:16 PM)Baegal Wrote: I think I liked Gen V because they started to use pure gray again rather than lots of hueshifting, but maybe I'm the only one? Any thoughts?

Absolutely. Gen V was a godsend for me. Bright pure colors.

(01-17-2013, 12:11 AM)Tonberry2k Wrote: Starting in gen 3 the designs started getting a little more complicated, but I think that has to do more with the fact that the games could now display more color, allowing for more intricate designs. It's just how it happens. It's like comparing Mario's design to, say, Bayonetta's. Mario is simple because he's a product of the limitations. Bayonetta gets to be way more detailed because she was designed when the hardware could handle... more.

But Mario stayed simple. When new Mario games came out they stuck with the simple cartoony look. They didn't decide to make the characters more complicated all of the sudden just because of technology. They realized Mario has a style and feel, so they stuck with it.

Mario's oldest foes:
http://www.mariowiki.com/Goomba
Mario's newest foes:
http://www.mariowiki.com/Waddlewing

Mario's oldest allies:
http://www.mariowiki.com/Toad_%28species%29
Mario's newest allies:
http://www.mariowiki.com/Luma_%28species%29