Unpopular opinions

[Pikachu315111]

Anyway, the staff members were basically saying that they will introduce less new Pokemon in upcoming games because they believe the number of Pokemon had grown too much.

I think that's for the best. We've got plenty of filler Pokemon now, I think its time to shift Pokemon creation to ones which, for a lack of a better way of saying this, "competitive". Make Pokemon that I want to use, have interesting gimmicks or fill a niche, maybe ones that revamp/re-invent old Moves, Abilities, or stategies. Shake-up the meta in ways we wouldn't think it could be shook up.

Also introduce more pre-evoutions, evolutions, forms, Mega Evolutions, and regional variants to give older Pokemon a time in the limelight. We've always want new Pokemon, but what some players don't realize is that we also want to see the older Pokemon getting added to and improved.

 

[Taistelu]

It isn't really an unpopular opinion.
Both Ken Sugimori and Shigeru Ohmori had said that the number of Pokemon has grown too much, that no one remembers them anymore.

How sad is it that if you show me a picture of a Pokemon, any one, and I'll name it?

I don't actually think this is an issue, if you can't remember 700 or so then you're probably not remembering 493 either, both are large numbers.

 

[Siggu]

I already had issues remembering them all when they were just 151 lol.

There are forgettable Pokemon in every generation, so not remembering the names or even the amount of Pokemon is natural. Especially the latter since Mega Evolutions and Alola Formes which are almost new Pokemon, but actually don't count.

 

[Codraroll]

It isn't really an unpopular opinion.
Both Ken Sugimori and Shigeru Ohmori had said that the number of Pokemon has grown too much, that no one remembers them anymore.

Khoodos begs to differ.

How sad is it that if you show me a picture of a Pokemon, any one, and I'll name it?

That's sad? I learned the above song by heart.

 

[Pikachu315111]

How sad is it that if you show me a picture of a Pokemon, any one, and I'll name it?

I don't actually think this is an issue, if you can't remember 700 or so then you're probably not remembering 493 either, both are large numbers.

Nah, it's not sad. I can do the same thing. :P

Khoodos begs to differ.

Nice. And obligatory.

Didn't learn it by heart. But still funny to watch.

 

[Rapti]

Since we're posting silly things, no one can say pokemon are difficult to remember unless they complete this test

367/802 but I swear it would have been like 50 more if it wasn't for pokemon silly spellings (why are you so hard to spell Wynaut? :< )

as for unpopular opinions, I wish you could participate in contests online, I've been doing battle royale both in game and online and let me tell you, not only is it fun but if you take into accout how strategic you have to get to win, battle royale is easier than contests

we can only hope someone makes a contest simulator someday (not that I'm holding my breath)

 

[Siggu]

as for unpopular opinions, I wish you could participate in contests online, I've been doing battle royale both in game and online and let me tell you, not only is it fun but if you take into accout how strategic you have to get to win, battle royale is easier than contests

I've been thinking of making a Battle Royale team to troll around. A Clefable, Starmie and Shiinotic with Spotlight to ruin things :P

I can understand why Contests are not on multiplayer - they don't seem to be the easiest thing to code for online given how Pokemon works. Battle Royale is just a gimmicky battle mode so it was doable.

(Which makes me wonder why other gimmicks like Inverse or Sky Battles were never available for online)

 

[Rapti]

I can understand why Contests are not on multiplayer - they don't seem to be the easiest thing to code for online given how Pokemon works. Battle Royale is just a gimmicky battle mode so it was doable.

I don't se how it would be difficult, sure moves have differnt effects and you can alter turn order/final result with conditions but aside from that the only thing that's different it's the making audience excited mechanic

I should clarify I'm not talking about gen IV contest with the judges but the gen III/gen VI ones (more the Gen VI ones)

 

[Codraroll]

Since we're posting silly things, no one can say pokemon are difficult to remember unless they complete this test

Managed 796 with 4 minutes left before I hit the wall and had to look them up. Managed to forget the name of Palossand's pre-evo (Sandygast) and Cutiefly's evolution (Ribombee), as well as Type:Null and Silvally, and Wimpod and Golisopod.

The Pokedex Song was very useful, though. Only had to try hard for the Gen VII ones.

Not going to do it again to beat my record.

 

[mertyville]

I am fine with just remembering what Pokemon is what type. Names are usually irrelevant to me especially if they are too long to remember.

 

[Cresselia~~]

I wouldn't attempt a Pokemon name test without pictures @@
I don't think I always know their types.

 

[stage7_4]

While I would probably fail that quiz due to some middle evolution I forgot, that does bring up a point.

If we count each evolution line or family as one pokemon, then how many pokemon families are there really? Mainly because when I think of pokemon I usually think of their final evolutions barring certain exceptions, and I don't think I'm alone in that notion.

Not arguing that Gamefreak isn't taking actions to fight the bloat, Mega-evolutions and Alola forms are more than proof than that. But just curious if our doomsday predictions are really as bad as we hype it up (which we do every single generation since inception).

My best guess is that we're really at about 500ish pokemon if you think of it my way, roughly half of the true 802 rounded up due to stuff like Eevee and generations that went legendary crazy (Gen 4, 5, and probably 7).

 

[Pikachu315111]

While I would probably fail that quiz due to some middle evolution I forgot, that does bring up a point.

If we count each evolution line or family as one pokemon, then how many pokemon families are there really? Mainly because when I think of pokemon I usually think of their final evolutions barring certain exceptions, and I don't think I'm alone in that notion.

Not arguing that Gamefreak isn't taking actions to fight the bloat, Mega-evolutions and Alola forms are more than proof than that. But just curious if our doomsday predictions are really as bad as we hype it up (which we do every single generation since inception).

My best guess is that we're really at about 500ish pokemon if you think of it my way, roughly half of the true 802 rounded up due to stuff like Eevee and generations that went legendary crazy (Gen 4, 5, and probably 7).

Well, this is something we can actually count.

 

[Endebros]

Since we're posting silly things, no one can say pokemon are difficult to remember unless they complete this test

367/802 but I swear it would have been like 50 more if it wasn't for pokemon silly spellings (why are you so hard to spell Wynaut? :< )

682/802 after 4 tries.

Stupid finnion...

The second time my brain decided that it didn't want to remember how to spell sudowoodo ;(


EDIT: I was taking the gearoid.me version

 

[stage7_4]

Well, this is something we can actually count.

Yeah, but I just didn't want to do it myself. Nudge nudge wink wink.

 

[Pikachu315111]

Yeah, but I just didn't want to do it myself. Nudge nudge wink wink.

*sigh* Be easier to break it up by generation:

Gen I: 78* (85 counting Alolan families as separate species)
Gen II: 51
Gen III: 73*
Gen IV: 45*
Gen V: 82
Gen VI: 37
Gen VII: 50
Total: 416 families (423 counting Alolan families)

*1. Counting each Nidoran gender line as separate family.
2. In Gen I it would have been 79 since the Hitmons weren't directly relate.
3. Volbeat and Illumise are counted as separate family.
4. Manaphy and Phione are counted as separate family.

 

[stage7_4]

*sigh* Be easier to break it up by generation:

Gen I: 78* (85 counting Alolan families as separate species)
Gen II: 51
Gen III: 73*
Gen IV: 45*
Gen V: 32
Gen VI: 37
Gen VII: 50
Total: 366 families (373 counting Alolan families)

*1. Counting each Nidoran gender line as separate family.
2. In Gen I it would have been 79 since the Hitmons weren't directly relate.
3. Volbeat and Illumise are counted as separate family.
4. Manaphy and Phione are counted as separate family.

Thank you kindly.

you are the best

Still, wow my estimate overshot by quite a bit. Only about 366 family lines, that's much smaller than I thought.

 

[Codraroll]

Still, wow my estimate overshot by quite a bit. Only about 366 family lines, that's much smaller than I thought.

Keep in mind that three-stage evolutionary families are quite rare, relatively speaking. I crunched some numbers on this a while ago, and found out that there are only 93 three-stage evolutionary families between all the 802 Pokémon, counting branched lines only once (and counting the Cosmog line, whose addition kind of screwed up my data). 40 of these three-stage families are starters (21 families), early-route bugs (6 families), early-route birds (5 families) or pseudo-legendaries (8 families).

Of the remaining 53, one family is legendary (the Cosmog line), and 16 are cross-generational (5 third members were added to lines in Gen II, 1 in Gen III, 10 in Gen IV). So you could make the case that only 36 "atypical, but ordinary" three-stage evolutionary families were envisioned across the seven generations we've seen so far.

By the way, Pikachu315111, you've made an error. There are, according to my geeky Excel spreadsheet, 82 evolutionary families in Gen V, not 32. And my count adds up to 51 families in Gen VII, not 50. Could be Cosmog throwing off the numbers again. Anyway, I get a total of 418 417 evolutionary families, but I don't think the Hitmon merge was counted for that case.

EDIT: Indeed it was Cosmog (stupid Cosmog) messing up the Gen VII numbers. I had counted 10 legendary Pokémon from 8 different families, should be 7 different since Cosmog, Cosmoem, Solgaleo and Lunala are members of the same family.

 

[Kurona]

Keep in mind that three-stage evolutionary families are quite rare, relatively speaking. I crunched some numbers on this a while ago, and found out that there are only 93 three-stage evolutionary families between all the 802 Pokémon, counting branched lines only once (and counting the Cosmog line, whose addition kind of screwed up my data). 40 of these three-stage families are starters (21 families), early-route bugs (6 families), early-route birds (5 families) or pseudo-legendaries (8 families).

Of the remaining 53, one family is legendary (the Cosmog line), and 16 are cross-generational (5 third members were added to lines in Gen II, 1 in Gen III, 10 in Gen IV). So you could make the case that only 36 "atypical, but ordinary" three-stage evolutionary families were envisioned across the seven generations we've seen so far.

By the way, Pikachu315111, you've made an error. There are, according to my geeky Excel spreadsheet, 82 evolutionary families in Gen V, not 32. And my count adds up to 51 families in Gen VII, not 50. Could be Cosmog throwing off the numbers again. Anyway, I get a total of 418 417 evolutionary families, but I don't think the Hitmon merge was counted for that case.

EDIT: Indeed it was Cosmog (stupid Cosmog) messing up the Gen VII numbers. I had counted 10 legendary Pokémon from 8 different families, should be 7 different since Cosmog, Cosmoem, Solgaleo and Lunala are members of the same family.

Little nitpick; if you're including branched families, would it not be more accurate to say three-member-families? Stage kind of implies they're all part of the same sequence.

 

[Codraroll]

Little nitpick; if you're including branched families, would it not be more accurate to say three-member-families? Stage kind of implies they're all part of the same sequence.

Branched families are counted once. so some three-stage lines (Ralts, Oddish, Poliwag, Wurmple, etc) would have only three stages, but four or more members. Likewise, some two-stage families have three members (Snorunt, Tyrogue, Clamperl...).

 

[Kurona]

Branched families are counted once. so some three-stage lines (Ralts, Oddish, Poliwag, Wurmple, etc) would have only three stages, but four or more members. Likewise, some two-stage families have three members (Snorunt, Tyrogue, Clamperl...).

Whoops, forgot Cosmoem existed for a minute.

But in that case why is Cosmog the only branched family counted? The Poliwag family is also branched and 3-stage.

 

[Pikachu315111]

By the way, Pikachu315111, you've made an error. There are, according to my geeky Excel spreadsheet, 82 evolutionary families in Gen V, not 32. And my count adds up to 51 families in Gen VII, not 50. Could be Cosmog throwing off the numbers again. Anyway, I get a total of 418 417 evolutionary families, but I don't think the Hitmon merge was counted for that case.

EDIT: Indeed it was Cosmog (stupid Cosmog) messing up the Gen VII numbers. I had counted 10 legendary Pokémon from 8 different families, should be 7 different since Cosmog, Cosmoem, Solgaleo and Lunala are members of the same family.

Oops

I knew I was going to do that. Whenever I count up to 50 I "reset" my counting, with the idea I'll add up my numbers in the end. *Sigh*

 

[Codraroll]

Whoops, forgot Cosmoem existed for a minute.

But in that case why is Cosmog the only branched family counted? The Poliwag family is also branched and 3-stage.

All branched families are counted, but only once. For instance, Vileplume and Bellossom count as one evolutionary family, not two. The reason why the Cosmog line was initially mentioned, was that it was messing up my system of counting each legendary as a separate family. Branch members count as no new family at all (since their family is accounted for elsewhere), and there was supposed to be an "other" category, for all families but starters, early-birds, early-rodents and pseudos, but including Cosmog there would involve taking it out of the "legendaries" category, and so on.

Stupid Cosmog.

 

[stage7_4]

All branched families are counted, but only once. For instance, Vileplume and Bellossom count as one evolutionary family, not two. The reason why the Cosmog line was initially mentioned, was that it was messing up my system of counting each legendary as a separate family. Branch members count as no new family at all (since their family is accounted for elsewhere), and there was supposed to be an "other" category, for all families but starters, early-birds, early-rodents and pseudos, but including Cosmog there would involve taking it out of the "legendaries" category, and so on.

Stupid Cosmog.

We tried to bag him away for the census, but you probably know how well that went.

gotta clean my fridge of these memes

While it is purely conjecture, 417 family lines isn't too hard to manage even with branched evolutions mucking it up. And while I know it just gets harder the more families you add, I still say pokemon has quite a bit of life left in the series.

Compare Digimon, which is spanning 1000+ monsters, some of which never got a moment in the sun. Or Yokai Watch where over half of them don't evolve at all (meaning as far as family lines go, Pokemon and Yokai Watch are probably about tied. But Yokai Watch is cheating with recolors, which are way more prevalent than alternate forms in Pokemon).

I don't think we're going to ever get another Gen V again bar remakes though, but just watch Gamefreak prove me wrong there.

While I don't want to get too far off topic, it is interesting to consider what other older mon series do to stay fresh. Like the Persona series (Shin Megami Tensei is technically the first monster catching game ever) draws on mythology, but also made it clear in series roots that the 'mons work on a rotational status besides certain mainstays. Meaning they get away with shorter 'mon lists per game, and with dropping a few here and there.

Not really something Pokemon can do in this stage of the game, and admittedly Shin Megami Tensei never had monster collecting as its focus.

got persona on the brain for some reason

Can't imagine why though.

 

[Mova]

Are you taking single-stage lines into account, stage7_4?

Digimon technically cheats with recolors as well, even if they're not as prevalent as Yo-kai Watch. They're treated more like Alolan regional variants than blatant recolors (except Gururumon and some other pointless ones). It's funny to see that Alola's chimeras, guardian deities, and Ultra Beasts are not fully confirmed to be sub-Legends by official sources despite in-game data suggesting them as such, but Cosmog and Cosmoem are somehow main Legends despite their uselessness. They're more like baby Pokémon that evolve into Legends if you think about it, even though they're still officially considered Legends.