Unpopular opinions

[Sixfortyfive]

The limits are part of the point of Gen 1 and part of its charm though.

You don’t replay Gen 1 because you want it to feel a like modern Pokemon game. You want to replay Gen 1 because it is pixel art, it has amazing tunes for the time that are addictive, it has a compelling story and narrative, and because it comes with a huge amount of other material, lore and merchandise that - and I speak as a Gen Wunner - you really had to be there, to understand it fully.

Gen 1 I would argue is best for casual playthroughs because it’s limiting on certain features. Not limited overall.

But if someone asked me if I’d go for a completely new 3D interpretation of Gen 1, like this:

Then sign me up!

This was not remotely true even when the game was brand new. Pretty much every single notable RPG on the SNES and Genesis clears it by miles on that front.

Like, you need only to point to the ending to discern that RBY isn't serious at all about its themes. Oak lectures Blue about how he lost because he "doesn't treat his Pokemon with love" even though literally nothing in the game actually demonstrates that he raises his team in a manner that's any different from what the player does.

And I've said before that if Gen 1 was actually written competently, then it either wouldn't have allowed the player to capture Mewtwo, or it would reward the player for declining the opportunity. You can't write in all of that backstory about how tragic and wrong it is for Mewtwo to have been brought into the world to be used as a tool and then just let the player capture him as a final checklist item without reconciling how thematically wrong that is for how it was set up.

We played Pokemon for the team-building gameplay and link/social component, not the story.

 

[AztecCroc]

This was not remotely true even when the game was brand new. Pretty much every single notable RPG on the SNES and Genesis clears it by miles on that front.

Like, you need only to point to the ending to discern that RBY isn't serious at all about its themes. Oak lectures Blue about how he lost because he "doesn't treat his Pokemon with love" even though literally nothing in the game actually demonstrates that he raises his team in a manner that's any different from what the player does.

And I've said before that if Gen 1 was actually written competently, then it either wouldn't have allowed the player to capture Mewtwo, or it would reward the player for declining the opportunity. You can't write in all of that backstory about how tragic and wrong it is for Mewtwo to have been brought into the world to be used as a tool and then just let the player capture him as a final checklist item without reconciling how thematically wrong that is for how it was set up.

We played Pokemon for the team-building gameplay and link/social component, not the story.

The backstory you're referring to doesn't exist in the original games, that's an anime thing. In RBY all that's said is that they found Mew in South America, it birthed Mewtwo, and then Mewtwo was to powerful and blew up the Mansion. Bulbapedia

Mewtwo had no other lore prior to the anime inventing everything else.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

The backstory you're referring to doesn't exist in the original games, that's an anime thing. In RBY all that's said is that they found Mew in South America, it birthed Mewtwo, and then Mewtwo was to powerful and blew up the Mansion. Bulbapedia

Mewtwo had no other lore prior to the anime inventing everything else.

Come on. You don't even have to get into the subtext to walk away from the Pokemon Mansion with the conclusion of "man, those scientists sure fucked up everything, huh." Seeing that this all happens post Silph Co as well, you're already plenty familiar with less-than-ethical scientists in general, so that's kind of become a running theme at this point.

But I'll go ahead and get into that subtext by reposting something I said a while ago, and in doing so I'm going to contradict myself a little bit here and give Gen 1 (and 3, I guess) its props where it's due: the story of Mewtwo and Fuji was actually some really well done subtext for a game that otherwise isn't very narrative-focused.

• You meet the elderly Mr. Fuji in the Pokemon Tower, who--in the process of paying respect to the deceased Marowak--is taking it upon himself to berate Team Rocket for their horrible mistreatment of Pokemon.
• After you dispatch the Rockets, Fuji gives you a key item to assist in your quest, but he also stresses that you'll succeed in the long run only if you treat Pokemon with kindness.
• Through the NPCs in Lavender Town and the FRLG Fame Checker, the only other concrete things you really learn about Mr. Fuji are that he primarily cares for orphaned Pokemon and, notably, is not originally from this area. One of the messages he leaves for the player through the Fame Checker is a suggestion that the player care not only for the happiness of their own Pokemon, but for the happiness of all Pokemon.
• Far later, on Cinnabar Island, you rummage through the ruined laboratory/mansion and glean the main details regarding the capture of Mew, the creation of Mewtwo, and the destruction of the mansion.
• Through the photos in the Cinnabar Gym and from some dialogue, it's revealed that Blaine and Fuji are old friends who used to research Pokemon together.
• In the Gen 3 Faraway Island event, a single very old and very faded message on the island's outskirts outlines the hope that the next person to set foot on the island be someone who is pure of heart. The Japanese version very clearly lays out that the message was left by Mr. Fuji.
• Deep in the island's interior, there is only a single wild Pokemon to be found: Mew.

Dr. Fuji, driven by guilt and regret over his role in the Pokemon Mansion disaster, returns Mew to the wild and dedicates the rest of his life to caring for mistreated Pokemon. It's nothing profound, and it's pretty easy to piece it all together so long as you're not just glossing over your surroundings, but it stands out for how much it doesn't railroad the player into digesting it. It's all just out there for you to pick up on your own. Even Mewtwo himself doesn't end up being some kind of rampaging boss encounter that you have to put a stop to as part of the story; he just presumably wanders off to the mountainside to live out the rest of his life in isolation from humankind.

I think the more story-centric legends of later generations are fine in their own right and that it was generally a good idea to incorporate many of them into the plot more directly, but Mewtwo's place in RBY is cool for how much it stands out in retrospect.

...If only RBY didn't kind of undo most of that well thought-out build-up by just letting you unceremoniously capture Mewtwo in the end anyway. Oh well.

 

[Ironmage]

This was not remotely true even when the game was brand new. Pretty much every single notable RPG on the SNES and Genesis clears it by miles on that front.

Like, you need only to point to the ending to discern that RBY isn't serious at all about its themes. Oak lectures Blue about how he lost because he "doesn't treat his Pokemon with love" even though literally nothing in the game actually demonstrates that he raises his team in a manner that's any different from what the player does.

And I've said before that if Gen 1 was actually written competently, then it either wouldn't have allowed the player to capture Mewtwo, or it would reward the player for declining the opportunity. You can't write in all of that backstory about how tragic and wrong it is for Mewtwo to have been brought into the world to be used as a tool and then just let the player capture him as a final checklist item without reconciling how thematically wrong that is for how it was set up.

We played Pokemon for the team-building gameplay and link/social component, not the story.

While I have no strong opinions on Mewtwo, I come down on the opposite position for more recent horrible mistakes of science. The labs are going through their Doctor Frankenstein moment of being terrible parents, and the mon itself is discarded for not meeting their expectations. Then the player comes in, willing to be as friendly to them as gameplay allows, keeping them from an environment their biology isn't made for just as much if not more than protecting said environment from a strange and powerful creature. As much as N tries to appreciate every mon, even he can't see past the cannon on the prototype Genesect. Type: Null evolves via friendship for a reason. Heck, for gen 9 I think it could really use an extension beyond the mons themselves, needing to destroy the robot Professor because its original purpose was bad still doesn't sit well with me for a series that's supposed to be cheery and optimistic.

 

[tentaghost]

The storyline in RBY was pretty well developed compared to some other contemporaries on the same console - only Link's Awakening and the two follow ups really beat it overall, IMO.

I mean gameboy games rarely have much of a story anyways, i dont think thats really saying much.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

While I have no strong opinions on Mewtwo, I come down on the opposite position for more recent horrible mistakes of science. The labs are going through their Doctor Frankenstein moment of being terrible parents, and the mon itself is discarded for not meeting their expectations. Then the player comes in, willing to be as friendly to them as gameplay allows, keeping them from an environment their biology isn't made for just as much if not more than protecting said environment from a strange and powerful creature. As much as N tries to appreciate every mon, even he can't see past the cannon on the prototype Genesect. Type: Null evolves via friendship for a reason. Heck, for gen 9 I think it could really use an extension beyond the mons themselves, needing to destroy the robot Professor because its original purpose was bad still doesn't sit well with me for a series that's supposed to be cheery and optimistic.

I've just never really been able to buy into the concept of "friendship" with Pokemon in the manner that the series attempts to dictate it, particulalry in the first games. Pokemon is functionally and fundamentally a franchise about cockfighting with a thin in-universe excuse of "Pokemon love to fight!" papered over it to soften its image. This is especially true in gen 1, which has virtually nothing to do outside of capturing and battling.

Like I've always found it to be kind of funny that the major controversy that surrounded Pokemon in the initial craze was that the evangelicals railed against it for being "evolution propaganda," and not PETA railing against it for its portrayal of animal companions as little more than battle fodder.

Saying that the player is "as friendly as can be allowed" to Mewtwo is I guess not technically untrue... but when you consider that all you can really do with Mewtwo is battle against it, catch it, battle with it, and let it live out its days in the ball/PC with the rest of your collection, isn't that a neutral statement at best?

 

[AztecCroc]

Come on. You don't even have to get into the subtext to walk away from the Pokemon Mansion with the conclusion of "man, those scientists sure fucked up everything, huh." Seeing that this all happens post Silph Co as well, you're already plenty familiar with less-than-ethical scientists in general, so that's kind of become a running theme at this point.

But I'll go ahead and get into that subtext by reposting something I said a while ago, and in doing so I'm going to contradict myself a little bit here and give Gen 1 (and 3, I guess) its props where it's due: the story of Mewtwo and Fuji was actually some really well done subtext for a game that otherwise isn't very narrative-focused.

• You meet the elderly Mr. Fuji in the Pokemon Tower, who--in the process of paying respect to the deceased Marowak--is taking it upon himself to berate Team Rocket for their horrible mistreatment of Pokemon.
• After you dispatch the Rockets, Fuji gives you a key item to assist in your quest, but he also stresses that you'll succeed in the long run only if you treat Pokemon with kindness.
• Through the NPCs in Lavender Town and the FRLG Fame Checker, the only other concrete things you really learn about Mr. Fuji are that he primarily cares for orphaned Pokemon and, notably, is not originally from this area. One of the messages he leaves for the player through the Fame Checker is a suggestion that the player care not only for the happiness of their own Pokemon, but for the happiness of all Pokemon.
• Far later, on Cinnabar Island, you rummage through the ruined laboratory/mansion and glean the main details regarding the capture of Mew, the creation of Mewtwo, and the destruction of the mansion.
• Through the photos in the Cinnabar Gym and from some dialogue, it's revealed that Blaine and Fuji are old friends who used to research Pokemon together.
• In the Gen 3 Faraway Island event, a single very old and very faded message on the island's outskirts outlines the hope that the next person to set foot on the island be someone who is pure of heart. The Japanese version very clearly lays out that the message was left by Mr. Fuji.
• Deep in the island's interior, there is only a single wild Pokemon to be found: Mew.

Dr. Fuji, driven by guilt and regret over his role in the Pokemon Mansion disaster, returns Mew to the wild and dedicates the rest of his life to caring for mistreated Pokemon. It's nothing profound, and it's pretty easy to piece it all together so long as you're not just glossing over your surroundings, but it stands out for how much it doesn't railroad the player into digesting it. It's all just out there for you to pick up on your own. Even Mewtwo himself doesn't end up being some kind of rampaging boss encounter that you have to put a stop to as part of the story; he just presumably wanders off to the mountainside to live out the rest of his life in isolation from humankind.

I think the more story-centric legends of later generations are fine in their own right and that it was generally a good idea to incorporate many of them into the plot more directly, but Mewtwo's place in RBY is cool for how much it stands out in retrospect.

...If only RBY didn't kind of undo most of that well thought-out build-up by just letting you unceremoniously capture Mewtwo in the end anyway. Oh well.

Again, a lot of what you're referencing is Gen 3 stuff not stuff that was in the original games to contribute to your idea of not being able to catch Mewtwo. The Fame Checker is not in Gen 1 and Mewtwo has no association with Team Rocket in RBY. Faraway Island is a thing found only in Emerald, it did not exist in Gen 1. The photo in Cinnabar Gym are an addition of FRLG. Literally all of your points are things that were added later after you were already capable of catching Mewtwo in Gen 1.

 

[pika pal]

So not sure how unpopular this opinion is, but I really really enjoy the Alola anime despite not vibing at all with Journeys. On paper I feel like I should regard them similarly, being significantly more episodic in focus and trying to give a more even cast focus thanks to having a smaller principle group, but I just do not like Go and feel his focus is OVER done even as a co-lead. I guess trying to give Ash a 50-50 Co-star at that point didn't feel natural compared to an ensemble cast in Alola or earlier in his tenure with May or Dawn.

While I have no strong opinions on Mewtwo, I come down on the opposite position for more recent horrible mistakes of science. The labs are going through their Doctor Frankenstein moment of being terrible parents, and the mon itself is discarded for not meeting their expectations. Then the player comes in, willing to be as friendly to them as gameplay allows, keeping them from an environment their biology isn't made for just as much if not more than protecting said environment from a strange and powerful creature. As much as N tries to appreciate every mon, even he can't see past the cannon on the prototype Genesect. Type: Null evolves via friendship for a reason. Heck, for gen 9 I think it could really use an extension beyond the mons themselves, needing to destroy the robot Professor because its original purpose was bad still doesn't sit well with me for a series that's supposed to be cheery and optimistic.

This is less about it being because of their original purpose and more that the AI professor is a keystone for the Time Machine, so there's a pragmatic reason completely independent of their personal morality behind the need to remove them. The game seems aware enough of this since it tries to smooth it over by giving them the personal interest in seeing the time they leave for to disable the machine rather than just going offline.

I've just never really been able to buy into the concept of "friendship" with Pokemon in the manner that the series attempts to dictate it, particulalry in the first games. Pokemon is functionally and fundamentally a franchise about cockfighting with a thin in-universe excuse of "Pokemon love to fight!" papered over it to soften its image. This is especially true in gen 1, which has virtually nothing to do outside of capturing and battling.

Like I've always found it to be kind of funny that the major controversy that surrounded Pokemon in the initial craze was that the evangelicals railed against it for being "evolution propaganda," and not PETA railing against it for its portrayal of animal companions as little more than battle fodder.

Saying that the player is "as friendly as can be allowed" to Mewtwo is I guess not technically untrue... but when you consider that all you can really do with Mewtwo is battle against it, catch it, battle with it, and let it live out its days in the ball/PC with the rest of your collection, isn't that a neutral statement at best?

This is a read I never really got; even as far back as Gen 1 media like the anime and, fittingly, the Mewtwo movie, the series makes a very VERY clear distinction between sanctioned Pokemon battles and what actual dangerous cock-fighting would be like. It's akin to the difference between something like boxing or Martial Arts and a bar fight: combat sports have an undertone of being a show of skill and ability within reason, not an active effort to kill the opponent. Team Rocket is shown poaching Pokemon through means that don't align with standard Pokeballs and Training, while battles and injuries that threaten the combatants life vs being a contest have very clear lines drawn (Ash objecting to that one guy's very harsh training regimen, the Manga battles with Gym Leaders and the League vs Giovanni or the Elite Four).

This whole "Pokemon is legalized cockfighting" schtick got old in 1998 because it clearly comes from people who don't follow the series or somehow fail to understand the overt aesop of a series aimed at 6-12 year olds even before the "think of the children" Americanizers got to it.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

Again, a lot of what you're referencing is Gen 3 stuff not stuff that was in the original games to contribute to your idea of not being able to catch Mewtwo. The Fame Checker is not in Gen 1 and Mewtwo has no association with Team Rocket in RBY. Faraway Island is a thing found only in Emerald, it did not exist in Gen 1. The photo in Cinnabar Gym are an addition of FRLG. Literally all of your points are things that were added later after you were already capable of catching Mewtwo in Gen 1.

There was always enough of this stuff present--even in gen 1--for you to fit together the pieces on your own. Fuji was involved in experiments on Cinnabar Island and had a pretty major lifestyle change that resulted in him being the caretaker of the orphan center in Lavender Town. Doesn't take a genius to piece together the reason why. Gen 3 just fleshed it out a little more. Like I said: this is the one major strength in gen 1's storytelling. This plot thread was always there in the background, and it was developed pretty well.

Like I distinctly remember playing the Faraway Island event in gen 3 for the first time, finding the note on the island, thinking to myself "There's only one established character who could have left this message." *checks Bulbapedia* "Yep, Fuji."

This is a read I never really got; even as far back as Gen 1 media like the anime and, fittingly, the Mewtwo movie, the series makes a very VERY clear distinction between sanctioned Pokemon battles and what actual dangerous cock-fighting would be like. It's akin to the difference between something like boxing or Martial Arts and a bar fight: combat sports have an undertone of being a show of skill and ability within reason, not an active effort to kill the opponent. Team Rocket is shown poaching Pokemon through means that don't align with standard Pokeballs and Training, while battles and injuries that threaten the combatants life vs being a contest have very clear lines drawn (Ash objecting to that one guy's very harsh training regimen, the Manga battles with Gym Leaders and the League vs Giovanni or the Elite Four).

This whole "Pokemon is legalized cockfighting" schtick got old in 1998 because it clearly comes from people who don't follow the series or somehow fail to understand the overt aesop of a series aimed at 6-12 year olds even before the "think of the children" Americanizers got to it.

This just reads as an application of the Thermian Argument: using the in-universe justification to deflect criticism, rather than evaluating the intentions behind its creation and the material experiences that the end user actually gets out of it.

Look, I want to make it clear that I am not passing a moral judgement on Pokemon. (Which I think should be obvious, but you can never be for sure.) Nothing in its text glorifies animal cruelty. That's not the point of literally anything that the franchise has ever produced. But Pokemon, specifically the first entry, is literally just a game about capturing critters and forcing them to battle, because that's a concept that its creators found to be cool. (And it is cool!) That one throwaway line by Oak at the very beginning of RBY--"Pokemon love to fight!"--is literally just a single-screen justification to soften the premise. You literally don't do anything in those games except capture and fight with Pokemon. That's all that the game is. That's the only itch that the creators were trying to scratch in their first crack at it. The reason why the scant few lines about "friendship" fail to land for me is because nothing in the game shows that. There's no weight behind those words. Your Pokemon aren't treated as "characters" with their own motivations or desires as would any party in any other RPG; they're literally just tools for you to acquire or discard as needed, and that's how they're presented.

And to any extent that this is an "issue," it's largely just confined to those original games. The more supplementary media and sequels came along, the more that this concept was softened further and properly fleshed out.

But that doesn't change how I feel that the resolution of Mewtwo's plotline in RBY was really sloppily done without much consideration for how it tied into whatever greater themes that RBY flirted with up to that point.

 

[AztecCroc]

Like I distinctly remember playing the Faraway Island event in gen 3 for the first time, finding the note on the island, thinking to myself "There's only one established character who could have left this message." *checks Bulbapedia* "Yep, Fuji."

Gen 3 is not Gen 1, especially Faraway Island which was only in Emerald.

Also that photo is in the Cinnabar Lab not the Gym, and does not show Blaine. The one in the gym that you originally referenced does not exist in Gen 1.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

Gen 3 is not Gen 1, especially Faraway Island which was only in Emerald.

Also that photo is in the Cinnabar Lab not the Gym, and does not show Blaine. The one in the gym that you originally referenced does not exist in Gen 1.

It is abundantly clear, in gen 1, that Fuji was involved in the Pokemon Mansion disaster, and it is reasonable to extrapolate that at least part of the reason why he's now the Lavender Town caretaker is because of that experience. And I think it's cool that gen 1 leaves you just enough crumbs to piece that together on your own instead of beating you over the head with it.

I don't know what you're trying to argue.

 

[Bakugames]

the subtext was clear enough that both the manga and anime knew what was going on tbh. it is not hard to grasp the worldbuilding of an abandoned destroyed lab, scientist papers lying all around about creating something and then seeing that powerful creature secluded in a cave

 

[Samtendo09]

I know for sure at one point in this thread that the light element can’t work as a Pokémon type due to overlaps.

But if there is one thing that I may want to be clear, is that I am not sold at all with the whole “Fairy = Light” argument, at least not in appearances.

An issue I have with this argument is that it’s not at all consistent about this aspect. While moves like Moonlight, Light of Ruin, Dazzling Gleam and Geomancy uses light, other moves like Draining Kiss, Play Rough, Spirit Break, Disarming Voice, Charm, Fairy Wind and Nature’s Madness don’t feel like light is involved in those.

Doesn’t help that the icon of Pokémon GO until Sword and Shield, where Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl depict the type icon instead portrays a pair of wings with two feet, not unlike a fairy. The Gen 8 icon can be misleading due to new players potentially mistaking it for the “light-type” despite Fairy having heavier emphasis on the fae and magical folklores.

(Source: Bulbapedia, Fairy (type))

If the fae and the light are two main elements of Fairy-type, light-based Pokémon like Xurkitree, Volbeat, Watchog, the Light trio (Solgaleo, Lunala and Necrozma, over Psychic), the Shinx line, and others will have the type by this logic, but that is not the case. Aspects of light are also present in various types, which I’ll say is a better argument why a Light-type would be better off as akin to sound.

• Fairy represents magical light, like in the mentioned moves.
• Grass and Fire use and produce natural light with Solar Beam + Solar Blade in Grass’ case.
• Electric can produce both natural and artifical light, and is related to light but too distinct to work as two elements in one.
• Psychic have an inconsistent but nonetheless notable use of cosmic or supernatural light, especially prominant with the aforementioned Light trio.
• Ghost also plays with supernatural light via Confuse Ray.
• Normal also produce natural light via Flash.

That’s not forgetting with the word “beam” also synonymous with the word laser, which is Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation, so it can argue that Hyper Beam, Aurora Beam, Signal Beam, Charge Beam and Meteor Beam involves light. Two additional moves, both from Scarlet and Violet, deserve a special mention:

• Fickle Beam explicily states that “The user shoots a beam of light […]” despite being Dragon-type, and it’s called Fickle Laser in Japan.
• Mighty Cleave (and Japanese name being Powerful Edge) doesn’t imply light, but it’s move description also states “The user wields the light that has accumulated atop its head to cleave the target […]”, which is surprising given it’s a physical Rock-type move.

The type I agree that fits best for secondary aspect of a type? Steel.

This may sound confusing, but here’s a list of all special moves regarding Steel:

• Doom Desire: Hits the target with strong, concentrated bundle of light.
• Flash Cannon: Self-explanatory.
• Make It Rain: Not light-based due to using solid golden coins. The only one of the six that cannot be considered light-based at all without stretching a definition of a word.
• Mirror Shot: As the name implies, it reflects light to damage the target.
• Steel Beam: This name is also self-explanatory.
• Tachyon Cutter: Not light-based based on name or description, as it’s based on particle of blade. You can argue that the particles of the blades are actually refracted light given the animation, but that might be stretching it.

Four out of six of these only Steel-type special moves involve light in one way or another, and it makes sense since metal can directly reflect or refract light akin to mirror, which is why Mirror Shot is Steel-type. So for more Special-oriented Steel-type moves to work, they can involve light with mirror-like skin / armor or directly manipulate light itself, and reducing overlap between Electric, Psychic and Fairy in that aspect. That, and liquid metals like mercury, which is surprisingly not a thing as a move or concept beyond the Meltan line.

 

[TerrickTerran]

The L in laser actually stands for light but steel is in my mind the closest to a light type

 

[tentaghost]

A part of me really wishes that pokemon kept the casual and competitive stuff completely seperate, alot of the games i feel get kneecapped by the fact that they have to design the games around being both a single player RPG with a general sense of progression and some amount of careful resource management and grinding while also making everything easily avaliable and balanced for the competitive scene, it makes the games feel very confused/conflicted in terms of their focus which is why im glad that legends and Champions exist because it feels like now pokemon can lean into one thing without stepping on the toes of the other.

 

[Ironmage]

I know for sure at one point in this thread that the light element can’t work as a Pokémon type due to overlaps.

But if there is one thing that I may want to be clear, is that I am not sold at all with the whole “Fairy = Light” argument, at least not in appearances.

An issue I have with this argument is that it’s not at all consistent about this aspect. While moves like Moonlight, Light of Ruin, Dazzling Gleam and Geomancy uses light, other moves like Draining Kiss, Play Rough, Spirit Break, Disarming Voice, Charm, Fairy Wind and Nature’s Madness don’t feel like light is involved in those.

Doesn’t help that the icon of Pokémon GO until Sword and Shield, where Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl depict the type icon instead portrays a pair of wings with two feet, not unlike a fairy. The Gen 8 icon can be misleading due to new players potentially mistaking it for the “light-type” despite Fairy having heavier emphasis on the fae and magical folklores.
View attachment 750481
(Source: Bulbapedia, Fairy (type))

If the fae and the light are two main elements of Fairy-type, light-based Pokémon like Xurkitree, Volbeat, Watchog, the Light trio (Solgaleo, Lunala and Necrozma, over Psychic), the Shinx line, and others will have the type by this logic, but that is not the case. Aspects of light are also present in various types, which I’ll say is a better argument why a Light-type would be better off as akin to sound.

• Fairy represents magical light, like in the mentioned moves.
• Grass and Fire use and produce natural light with Solar Beam + Solar Blade in Grass’ case.
• Electric can produce both natural and artifical light, and is related to light but too distinct to work as two elements in one.
• Psychic have an inconsistent but nonetheless notable use of cosmic or supernatural light, especially prominant with the aforementioned Light trio.
• Ghost also plays with supernatural light via Confuse Ray.
• Normal also produce natural light via Flash.

That’s not forgetting with the word “beam” also synonymous with the word laser, which is Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation, so it can argue that Hyper Beam, Aurora Beam, Signal Beam, Charge Beam and Meteor Beam involves light. Two additional moves, both from Scarlet and Violet, deserve a special mention:

• Fickle Beam explicily states that “The user shoots a beam of light […]” despite being Dragon-type, and it’s called Fickle Laser in Japan.
• Mighty Cleave (and Japanese name being Powerful Edge) doesn’t imply light, but it’s move description also states “The user wields the light that has accumulated atop its head to cleave the target […]”, which is surprising given it’s a physical Rock-type move.

The type I agree that fits best for secondary aspect of a type? Steel.

This may sound confusing, but here’s a list of all special moves regarding Steel:

• Doom Desire: Hits the target with strong, concentrated bundle of light.
• Flash Cannon: Self-explanatory.
• Make It Rain: Not light-based due to using solid golden coins. The only one of the six that cannot be considered light-based at all without stretching a definition of a word.
• Mirror Shot: As the name implies, it reflects light to damage the target.
• Steel Beam: This name is also self-explanatory.
• Tachyon Cutter: Not light-based based on name or description, as it’s based on particle of blade. You can argue that the particles of the blades are actually refracted light given the animation, but that might be stretching it.

Four out of six of these only Steel-type special moves involve light in one way or another, and it makes sense since metal can directly reflect or refract light akin to mirror, which is why Mirror Shot is Steel-type. So for more Special-oriented Steel-type moves to work, they can involve light with mirror-like skin / armor or directly manipulate light itself, and reducing overlap between Electric, Psychic and Fairy in that aspect. That, and liquid metals like mercury, which is surprisingly not a thing as a move or concept beyond the Meltan line.

It's also worth noting that Make it Rain and Tachyon Cutter are both signature moves, so Steel fully needs the light aspect to function on the special side. Honestly, even if you cut out Steel Beam, that move's limitations mean that I feel the argument still holds.

Side note: Tachyon Cutter does have another tangential connection: tachyons are hypothetical/sci-fi particles with the noteworthy trait of moving at or above lightspeed.

 

[pika pal]

This just reads as an application of the Thermian Argument: using the in-universe justification to deflect criticism, rather than evaluating the intentions behind its creation and the material experiences that the end user actually gets out of it.

Look, I want to make it clear that I am not passing a moral judgement on Pokemon. (Which I think should be obvious, but you can never be for sure.) Nothing in its text glorifies animal cruelty. That's not the point of literally anything that the franchise has ever produced. But Pokemon, specifically the first entry, is literally just a game about capturing critters and forcing them to battle, because that's a concept that its creators found to be cool. (And it is cool!) That one throwaway line by Oak at the very beginning of RBY--"Pokemon love to fight!"--is literally just a single-screen justification to soften the premise. You literally don't do anything in those games except capture and fight with Pokemon. That's all that the game is. That's the only itch that the creators were trying to scratch in their first crack at it. The reason why the scant few lines about "friendship" fail to land for me is because nothing in the game shows that. There's no weight behind those words. Your Pokemon aren't treated as "characters" with their own motivations or desires as would any party in any other RPG; they're literally just tools for you to acquire or discard as needed, and that's how they're presented.

And to any extent that this is an "issue," it's largely just confined to those original games. The more supplementary media and sequels came along, the more that this concept was softened further and properly fleshed out.

But that doesn't change how I feel that the resolution of Mewtwo's plotline in RBY was really sloppily done without much consideration for how it tied into whatever greater themes that RBY flirted with up to that point.

Don't hit me with the Thermian Argument nonsense, I'm sick of that one because so often I see it used in exactly this manner: ignoring what the text is actually saying to apply a read or theme to it that its written material blatantly does not align with or support. The conflict is essentially arguing from a Watsonian vs Doylist perspective, but in the worst cases the Doylist is not arguing with the body of the text, only their interpretation of it, and thus can be selective with what text they even bother to contend with (i.e. "I don't buy this" when the point remains that that information and portrayal is there and has to be recognized if only to be refuted or contradicted). The Thermian argument is using reasoning within the text to justify what was written for the text, it is NOT pointing to elements of the text to illustrate themes or points that the work is depicting or that contextualize the behaviors of the characters. Don't argue to me that the game contradicts its own themes and then call it a Thermian Argument when I point out textual material in the effort to explain what those actions and events are in context (and thus their meaning rather than the on-the-face happening).

The game says that Pokemon enjoy battling, and any allusion to treating them as tools or a resource is framed in an outright negative manner with Team Rocket and Oak's (flat or not) speech to your rival. Trying to say Pokemon even in Gen 1 is "functionally and fundamentally a franchise about cockfighting with a thin in-universe excuse" is silly at best and bad-faith at worst, considering the justification, brief or not, is there and doesn't contradict any real world concepts or parallels (Physical/Combat themed sports have existed for centuries). Put another way, it's arguing against a thinly-supported or not "serious" premise with a separate premise that either lacks evidence or is actively untrue and shot down by what IS in the work.

On the original point, this is again projecting a LOT onto Mewtwo. The sins specifically committed against Mewtwo are genetic splicing and recombining for it seemingly in-Utero, but unlike the Gen 1 anime, the RBY Journals on Cinnabar never specify that Mewtwo was being created as a weapon, only that it bore a vicious disposition as a result of the experiments (if this is explicitly mentioned in the Generation 1 GB game text, legitimately present it to me because I want to be arguing from accurate references). Fuji's arc hinges on the idea that he has wronged Mewtwo's existence, not strictly that he created it as a Bioweapon or solely to battle, which would be what comes into conflict with it becoming a Player's Pokemon later, and we have real world precedent for Genetic Experimentation (inhumane or otherwise) on humans and animals for purposes that weren't strictly warfare oriented (could be Medicinal, for study, or just twisted "what would happen if?" curiosity).

The Pokedex likewise never specifies Mewtwo as being created for Battling until Generation 2, while the RGBY entries (and FRLG retranslations) at least in English only ever make reference to vaguer terms of "experiments" and "research" that could just as likely be read as Mewtwo's power being a byproduct of experiements done for other purposes. Given Mew is a Myth in-universe and no slouch of a battler in contemporary depictions, it's not particularly far-fetched that experimenting on its offspring could make it too powerful unintentionally given there's much less of a leap than from something like a Tauros or Nidos.

For the Cerulean Cave scenario, it's also assuming that capturing Mewtwo is objectively the wrong thing to do from a bigger picture perspective. Whatever the read one takes of Mewtwo's origin in RBY and Gen 1 collectively, without the full hindsight of the franchise that was noted to have further developed/smoothed over these concepts, the objective information available is that it's a monstrously powerful creature (one that at minimum can destroy a building and travel halfway across the region) with a vicious disposition. Replace Mewtwo in this example with a real world escaped animal like a lion, a bear, or even just a large dog, that has gotten out of an abusive environment and currently roaming free. Maybe putting it back into captivity doesn't feel fair when focusing on its own circumstance, but undeterred it represents a danger to its environment and other living things around it. The alternative interpretation therein is that capturing Mewtwo and training it allows it to channel and control those combative urges in a manner that Pokemon "like" per Oak's opening speech, both ensuring it doesn't kill things and can interact rather than isolate itself. Calling this a contradiction hinges on either the act of capturing Mewtwo AT ALL being a morally questionable action, and/or the assumption that the player will not treat Mewtwo in a humane manner after capturing it, be that within the game mechanics or headcanon'd behavior that the gameplay would not depict (Positively such as brefriending and socializing it or negatively in abusing it as a Prize-Fighter or a weapon).

This requires multiple levels of conjecture to read the presented material negatively. I fully admit to extrapolating a great deal myself, but I made efforts to base them on extending material written into the game such as the Journals and the Dex entries before drawing "real world" parallels, as opposed to dismissing explicit text for "failing to land" and then arguing from the opposite, less charitable premise as if it's equally supported. "Pokemon enjoy battling" not being well supported (not contradicted, just not strongly convincing to a viewer) does not strictly mean "Pokemon battles are cockfighting" IS supported by the text as a lens that's in turn sensible to color material therein.

 

[QuentinQuonce]

This was not remotely true even when the game was brand new. Pretty much every single notable RPG on the SNES and Genesis clears it by miles on that front.

Like, you need only to point to the ending to discern that RBY isn't serious at all about its themes. Oak lectures Blue about how he lost because he "doesn't treat his Pokemon with love" even though literally nothing in the game actually demonstrates that he raises his team in a manner that's any different from what the player does.

Have to quibble this; I would disagree nothing in the game points to this attitude, there's a fair amount that does - it's just fairly under-the-surface.

The fact that Blue replaces his Raticate, for instance: there's nothing inherently wrong with that - obviously the player can do the same as they choose without issue - but the implication I always got was that he decided "Raticate is a trashmon, I can do better" and that goes against the spirit of "use your favourites, regardless of whether they're strong or weak". Blue's team are all, more or less, the top tier of their respective types, and this feels intentional - similar to Silver, he repeatedly mentions wanting to find and catch "strong Pokemon" as opposed to making his Pokemon strong through training them. Even his loss quote after the first battle ("WHAT? Unbelievable! I picked the wrong Pokémon!") suggests that he doesn't feel that much of a connection to his starter. He doesn't say, for instance, "oh no, I lost - but I still like this one the best"; instead, the implication is that he simply picked the wrong tool for the job.

And his focus is all on winning and collecting, not growing. He treats it like a race, your typical "all about the destination and not the journey" mentality ("[...] you're still struggling along back here? I'm doing great! I caught a bunch of strong and smart Pokémon!", "[...] So how's your Pokédex coming? I already caught 40 kinds, pal!") In the anime Ash and Gary have a scene where Gary brags that he's caught over a hundred different species versus Ash's sparse handful, but Ash counters "yeah, but how many of those are your friends?" There's a similar, if unstated, mentality in play here with Blue because he's never stated to care deeply for Pokemon, unlike various NPCs around Kanto who proclaim how much they love and care for their partners. He doesn't fight against Team Rocket - instead leaving it to be the player's problem - and his attitude to Marowak is quite telling: despite it apparently being common knowledge that Team Rocket killed one, he blithely says, "I can't find the grown-up Marowak yet! I doubt there are any left! Well, I better get going [...]". Shit happens, basically.

And I've said before that if Gen 1 was actually written competently, then it either wouldn't have allowed the player to capture Mewtwo, or it would reward the player for declining the opportunity. You can't write in all of that backstory about how tragic and wrong it is for Mewtwo to have been brought into the world to be used as a tool and then just let the player capture him as a final checklist item without reconciling how thematically wrong that is for how it was set up.

We played Pokemon for the team-building gameplay and link/social component, not the story.

I don't entirely disagree with your take on capturing Mewtwo, or more broadly a lot of the plot-relevant legendaries in later games (actually one of the things I like about SwSh is the way it kind of squared the circle on this - you can catch and use Eternatus, just not the ultra-powerful Eternamax form) but ultimately I think that capturing it is... fine, really. I mean, ultimately story always comes second to gameplay (and that's so obvious it's barely worth me typing it) and gameplay-wise of course we have to capture Mewtwo, it's the strongest Pokemon, it's the final challenge, it's awesome, every eight-year old wanted one. But even thinking purely from an in-universe standpoint: again I think the inference is that, yeah, Mewtwo might well be fucked up and has suffered greatly at the hands of humans and has hidden itself away... but you, the player, are a good person, and if anyone is going to treat it well and repair its relationship with Pokemon, it'll be you (funnily enough considering I mentioned Eternatus earlier, this is basically the reasoning given for Leon capturing it in the anime, and he does eventually heal it of its trauma and help it control its power).

Maybe that's inferring a little too much from what the game gives us - but I don't think any of it is a stretch. And again I'm perhaps influenced by the anime here because this is so often Ash's role with Pokemon who fear or distrust humans: Ash proves to them through his actions that not all humans are like that and helps to heal their past trauma. It's just that the games don't have much of a way to recreate that dynamic - even in the instances an NPC gives you a gift Pokemon and says "I think it needs to be around people" or "it was mistreated by its previous owner, please take care of it", it's basically just... like any other Pokemon, to the point that they even start with the base friendship level instead of 0 (but even that wouldn't drastically change the overall experience of raising them). Even Shadow Pokemon function almost identically to regular ones.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

Have to quibble this; I would disagree nothing in the game points to this attitude, there's a fair amount that does - it just fairly under-the-surface.

The fact that Blue replaces his Raticate, for instance: there's nothing inherently wrong with that - obviously the player can and will do the same without consequence - but the inference I always got was that he decided "Raticate is a trashmon, I can do better" and that goes against the spirit of "use your favourites, regardless of whether they're strong or weak". Blue's team are all, more or less, the top tier of their respective types, and this feels intentional - similar to Silver, he repeatedly mentions wanting to find and catch "strong Pokemon" as opposed to making his Pokemon strong through training them. Even his loss quote after the first battle ("WHAT? Unbelievable! I picked the wrong Pokémon!") infers that he doesn't feel that much of a connection to his starter. He doesn't say, for instance, "oh no, I lost - but I still like this one the best"; instead, the implication is that he simply picked the wrong tool for the job,

And his focus is all on winning and collecting, not growing. He treats it like a race, your typical "all about the destination and not the journey" mentality ("[...] you're still struggling along back here? I'm doing great! I caught a bunch of strong and smart Pokémon!", "[...] So how's your Pokédex coming? I already caught 40 kinds, pal!") In the anime Ash and Gary have a scene where Gary brags that he's caught over a hundred different species versus Ash's sparse handful, but Ash counters "yeah, but how many of those are your friends?" There's a similar, if unstated, mentality in play here with Blue because he's never stated to care deeply for Pokemon, unlike various NPCs around Kanto who proclaim how much they love and care for their partners. He doesn't fight against Team Rocket - instead leaving it to be the player's problem - and his attitude to Marowak is quite telling: despite it apparently being common knowledge that Team Rocket killed one, he blithely says, "I can't find the grown-up Marowak yet! I doubt there are any left! Well, I better get going [...]". Shit happens, basically.

This halfway works, but where it falls apart is that there's nothing to punish the player for being even more of a battle-optimized tryhard than Blue is.

Like it's just funny to me that I roll into the E4 with some combination of a trio of legendary birds, other high BST heavy hitters of my own, and an HM slave or whatever, and have literally caught 90% of my mons only for the sake of Pokedex completion before stuffing them into the PC never to breathe fresh air again, and Oak chooses to scold his grandson instead of me.

It also shouldn't go without saying that much of Blue's team stays pretty consistent over the course of the game. He's probably swapping out his main team less than the average player! Sure, he ditches Raticate, but Pidgeot held on to the very end.

And that kind of gets at my main beef with how gen 1 handles its narrative and themes: it's very much "tell, don't show." And what is shown can often contradict what is told.

Like even if there was something as simple as Oak giving you a less enthusiastic congratulations if you ditched your starter for the final battle, that would be worth a lot imo.

 

[Bakugames]

blue a dumb idiot raticate solos pidgeot everytime!!!!!!!!!! maybe your lead pokemon wouldnt be ass if u kept ur raticate instead 4head!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Volt-Ikazuchi]

Very curious as to your reasoning. RBY is extremely archaic and hard to go back to unless you're actively trying to abuse glitches or other cracks in the game design. I would not hesitate to point someone to FRLG if they want to experience Kanto.

You see, I find Gen 3 extremely archaic.

It's in that weird in-between of being modern enough to have EVs, natures, and enough moves for types to minimally function (for the most part), but it doesn't have the modern split.

Gen 1 has a ton of jank, but it's very unique. So, to me, there's more value in that unique experience than the sterilized version that doesn't even connect to Stadium 1.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

FRLG lacking a real battle facility and generally being much less user-friendly for the competitive component than Emerald also means that it has to lean more on its RPG quest side than its competitive side, and even though in a vacuum I'd still take that over RBY, I can totally see why that wouldn't be interesting enough for some.

 

[QuentinQuonce]

This halfway works, but where it falls apart is that there's nothing to punish the player for being even more of a battle-optimized tryhard than Blue is.

Like it's just funny to me that I roll into the E4 with some combination of a trio of legendary birds, other high BST heavy hitters of my own, and an HM slave or whatever, and have literally caught 90% of my mons only for the sake of Pokedex completion before stuffing them into the PC never to breathe fresh air again, and Oak chooses to scold his grandson instead of me.

It also shouldn't go without saying that much of Blue's team stays pretty consistent over the course of the game. He's probably swapping out his main team less than the average player! Sure, he ditches Raticate, but Pidgeot held on to the very end.

And that kind of gets at my main beef with how gen 1 handles its narrative and themes: it's very much "tell, don't show." And what is shown can often contradict what is told.

Yeah I don't disagree with this at all. The games push the whole mindset of "use your favourites, play with honour" but, as you say, there's no real penalty for not doing so. Even in later games where you can actively make your Pokemon unhappy, you're still venerated as a saint who loves and cherishes their Pokemon. The closest you ever get to a rebuke is if you basically don't bother actively catching anything more than a couple of battlers and an HM slave; as you're entering the Hall of Fame the resident professor will evaluate your Pokedex and say "only 7 Pokemon registered? You need to put more effort in" or something.

And that's fine too. Maybe there are lots of players who don't like any of the starters and will happily box them asap in favour of other stuff. That's part of the appeal of the series, you can use whatever you want on your team and it's all fine. The game basically tells you the way it thinks you ought to be playing, but it usually doesn't outright force it outside of certain choice moments. It is presumed that you are doing things the right way - or, I suppose, that whatever you are doing is the right way.

Like even if there was something as simple as Oak giving you a less enthusiastic congratulations if you ditched your starter for the final battle, that would be worth a lot imo.

Again, agreed. Partly I think the absence of this is just due to how much less responsive the dialogue in the earlier gens is, which later games have increasingly been better about (examples which come to mind are stuff like how in DPP Rowan will actually acknowledge if you manage to evolve your starter before reaching Sandgem Town or how in BW Cheren will change his dialogue if the player didn't take any damage during their first battle with Bianca - also, fun fact, in BW Cedric Juniper has varying dialogue depending on whether the player has seen a Klink when they first meet him, even though it's impossible not to have seen it because N uses one).

Then again, Oak says "you've grown up so much since you left with [starter]", but that's not a direct endorsement of you using your starter forever. Hell, in one light it could even be read as complimenting you on not having your starter ("well done on outgrowing your Squirtle") though I don't think that's how it's intended.

Stuff like the cutscene in USUM where your starter pops out of its ball in front of the Pokemon League is a good way to reward (well, less reward but certainly encourage) sticking with your starter without railroading things - god knows I've played several of the games enough times that I tossed my starter away early on.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

This was not remotely true even when the game was brand new. Pretty much every single notable RPG on the SNES and Genesis clears it by miles on that front.

Where did I say SNES or Genesis (Megadrive)?

Manchester United would like their goalposts back…

…We played Pokemon for the team-building gameplay and link/social component, not the story.

No, you did. I know of loads of other adults my age who played it for the story and the general catching mechanics.

 

[Ironmage]

I've actually grown to dislike the emphasis on the starter and similar when it comes to implementing "win via a bond with your favourite" because it assumes that your favourite is part of a very small pool that GF has picked without your agency. There's no credit in making it to the USUM league with a Vikavolt met on route 1, is the extra 0.5% of gameplay time (and admittedly much more than that in cutscenes) that important?

You know, maybe I should add the Hall to the list of Battle Facilities I really think should come back. Somewhere that openly challenges you to win with your favourite with availability being little object.