• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

(Little) Things that annoy you in Pokémon

Maybe not "annoying" but definitely "confusing":

Why are they treating "Leaf" and "Green*" as separate characters?
Like this isnt a Lyra/Kris situation, where Lyra is just the replacement for Kris and both are actualyl still distinct from each other, these are so obviously the same character adjusted for differing art styles.
140px-FireRed_LeafGreen_Leaf.png
160px-Lets_Go_Pikachu_Eevee_Green.png


They're even doing the same "holding pokeball behind their back" pose with the same bag slung over the same shoulder. And inversely colored shirt.

And its like okay, maybe it was just a retcon, right? To bring her in line with Red & Blue now that she's actually in the games. Sort of like how "Gold" became "Ethan"**
But no!
Leaf got new merch and is referred to as "Leaf" explicitly. And she got into Masters well after Let's Go as "Leaf". Meanwhile Green got a TCG card labeling her as Green ("Green's Exploration")
429px-GreenExplorationUnbrokenBonds175.jpg


It's very silly.


*Yes yes she's Blue in Japan. It is kind of funny how it aligned though, with the whole "Leaf Green" thing
**Though it is goofy how Gold got an updated name to go with modern conventions but Silver's still Silver.

e: As I was typing this out the other thread went on the same tirade. Love the synergy
I wonder if this will end up like the intern from Phineas and Ferb. His name was spelled "Karl" in the credits, but it was spelled "Carl" in the actual animation. The writers fixed this by making his actual canon name "Carl Karl".

Is she still called Leaf in Japan, or is the confusion only in the west? Blue Leaf wouldn't make for a good name.
 
I wonder if this will end up like the intern from Phineas and Ferb. His name was spelled "Karl" in the credits, but it was spelled "Carl" in the actual animation. The writers fixed this by making his actual canon name "Carl Karl".

Is she still called Leaf in Japan, or is the confusion only in the west? Blue Leaf wouldn't make for a good name.
The GBA design is still "Leaf' in Japan, yeah
artfx-j-leaf-with-zenigame-squirtle.jpg


Funnily enough, as you can see here, Leaf is still associated with Squirtle despite being named after the green remake.
Red got Pikachu and Blue got Eevee in the same line
 
The GBA design is still "Leaf' in Japan, yeah
artfx-j-leaf-with-zenigame-squirtle.jpg


Funnily enough, as you can see here, Leaf is still associated with Squirtle despite being named after the green remake.
Red got Pikachu and Blue got Eevee in the same line
I meant the new design. Is that incarnation of the character being called both Blue and Leaf?
 
I meant the new design. Is that incarnation of the character being called both Blue and Leaf?
The new Let's Go design is "Blue" in Japan, yes.

GBA Design: Leaf in both regions
Let's Go Design: Blue in Japan, Green in the West

e: If "Pink Version" had happened I wonder if she would have premiered there and if her name would be "Pink" or if we'd somehow have 3 versions of this character running around
 
Why are they treating "Leaf" and "Green*" as separate characters?

(...)

And its like okay, maybe it was just a retcon, right? To bring her in line with Red & Blue now that she's actually in the games. Sort of like how "Gold" became "Ethan"**
But no!
Leaf got new merch and is referred to as "Leaf" explicitly. And she got into Masters well after Let's Go as "Leaf". Meanwhile Green got a TCG card labeling her as Green ("Green's Exploration")

It's very silly.

(...)

*Yes yes she's Blue in Japan. It is kind of funny how it aligned though, with the whole "Leaf Green" thing
**Though it is goofy how Gold got an updated name to go with modern conventions but Silver's still Silver.

e: As I was typing this out the other thread went on the same tirade. Love the synergy

Hello, other person that went on a Leaf/Green tirade. :blobnom: Just as I said on the Unpopular Opinion, if you want to see how absurd this argument gets to the point in turns comical I suggest reading Bulbapedia's discussion page for both characters: Green and Leaf. :bloblul:
 
The new Let's Go design is "Blue" in Japan, yes.

GBA Design: Leaf in both regions
Let's Go Design: Blue in Japan, Green in the West

e: If "Pink Version" had happened I wonder if she would have premiered there and if her name would be "Pink" or if we'd somehow have 3 versions of this character running around
OOOOHHH, I just realized I misunderstood. I thought that the Let's Go design was being called both Green and Leaf, but what's actually happening is that the FRLG design is still being treated as a separate character.
 
OOOOHHH, I just realized I misunderstood. I thought that the Let's Go design was being called both Green and Leaf, but what's actually happening is that the FRLG design is still being treated as a separate character.
Yes, correct, when I was putting the asterisk on Green it was just to acknowledge that "Green" is "Blue" in Japan not that she's "Blue" for both designs now in Japan.
 
Premise, I can understand if this could count as derailing the thread (since in theory it's annoyances about pokemon and not about games in general), so if that's the case I don't mind continuing the topic on DMs or elsewhere.

Premise n2: my extreme lack of faith in the last generations as well as humans in general isn't exactly new expecially considering where I live and the current situation, so please forgive my... a bit extreme tone there.

That said, I found fun that you brought up Persona 5. Persona and SMT in general has a hardcore community that expresses exactly the same opinions I read on these boards about Pokemon games.
In the speedrun community which I belong to for example, "They are too easy", "the plot is boring in the last entries", "the last good game was Persona 3", "Atlus only wants to milk our money and stopped making good games" are topics I hear all the time. Don't they sound a bit familiar to what you read on the smogon boards?
And on some, they aren't wrong. Persona 5 and 5 royal are extremely easy games compared to their predecessors, and even an idiot would be able to complete them, and in the latest entry they even went as far as reworking the so called "Merciless" difficulty to the point where it's actually easier than normal mode once you understood the only mechanic change. And indeed some of the new plot entries are very terrible superficially (that is, if you aren't able to scratch the surface and read the metaphors)
You can look for similar shenenigans in a ton of "hardcore" communities of multiple games, at this point I'd be surprised if there's not a subreddit where people praise lord and savior Ocarina of Time and spam how all games after it are trash and BotW was just a overhyped garbage. Which is always overshadowed by a ridicolously bigger number of casual players and newcomers to the series that absolutely adore the latest title

Now, why do I bring this up? I think you misunderstood what I said with the latest entries of the various RPGs.

I did not say the games became "bad", or that they don't touch important subjects or don't have good stories, because it's not the case.
In fact, expecially JRPGs more and more love to make metaphors or the real life scenarios
Even Pokemon Sword and Shield, while not optimally, touches important themes like orphans, energy conservation, pollution, excessive fanboyism, and the Twilight Wings anime series is doubling onto touching serious themes in a more "child friendly" light.
While games, Pokemon included, have evolved to give a lot of real life references and try to """guide""" young people, however most of them have also been becoming easier and more accessible, with difficulty options all but disappearing in a lot of franchises and leaving any difficulty to the player's self-imposed challenge.
They also often have been hit by the issue I mentioned earlier, where they give a LOT of possibilities to players to play in whatever way they prefer, but with the result that any player capable of combining the systems offered ends up breaking the game inevitably very early, as soon as all the options are available.

All of this is due to a big generational shift in the gaming habits that GameFreaks actually read correctly: your typical 202x gamer is someone who enjoys playing a game for a small amount of time then dropping it. Playing it on his Switch with friends at the park. Who doesn't really care to look at complex mechanics. Who doesn't want to pidgeonholed in one playstyle, and wants to be able to "play the game as he likes".
The gamer like us have been long gone. The players who enjoyed playing the original World of Warcraft without a guide and discovering everything on our own by committing several hours per day every day. The players who loved to replay Super Mario Land over and over until you could finish it with 1 life. The player who yes, liked to get hardwalled by Miltank in Pokemon Silver and had to grind it out or find on his own a way to stop getting literally rolled over. The player who spent a ridicolous amount grinding the hell out of Disgaea's postgame to beat the final postgame boss.
Those are type of gamers that are dieing, and certain genres like MMOs are dieing with them.

In this case I'm not really ranting on "stupidity" of your modern gamer or young in general, but literally a generational shift of players who do not want to invest excessive time in the game, and that when they get stuck, will either look at a guide online, ask a friend how they beat it, or just give up.

And, if you are a gaming company, expecially an AAA one under the pressure of their publisher and investors that demand you to gain a minimal revenue that's a ridicolous number... who are you going to aim your game at?
Are you going to invest your money and development time into that small % of older playerbase who liked challenging, long games, and looked at graphic details and coherency as prime successes, or at the younger, way more numerous playerbase who likes casual approaches, doesn't exactly care of graphical artifacts and is guaranteed to be easy to make happy by just making a fun story with typical stereotypes?

I sure know the answer there, and who am I to blame them?

If anything, I am happy that despite the fact that the AAA design is moving more and more toward the casualization of gameplay rather than longevity and details, most of them (expecially in Japan as I believe it's a cultural thing for them, and yes this includes Pokemon) still do their best to include deep thinking moments and address real life situations.

That said, as I said in the premise, if you or the others think this derails the topic, I am glad to provide further details via DM if you prefer and want.

I'm happy you elaborated a bit, but I still vehemently disagree. I dunno about you, but I really don't think games like the Dark Souls series, Sekiro, various roguelikes and the return of Megaman would've happened or done as well as they did if there was such a massive decline in players who crave a challenge. Literally one of the biggest trends in Poketubing of the past several months as of this discussion is these insane solo run challenges where people try to beat various games with shit like Ditto and Feebas. I'm sure these vids and games have sizable adult segments of their communities, but those would only be able to carry them so far, certainly not to millions upon millions of sales with backing from major companies like Bandai Namco.

Anyways I wanna wrap this up, so let's move on to... sigh

I thought this demon had been vanquished. I've voiced many times across various OI threads on how much I think GSC boss design is a disaster through a series of rants and teambuilding analyses, with one of my most consistent complaints being their refusal to take advantage of Johto's own new Pokemon.

But at a certain point, even in such a poorly-constructed host of Gym Leaders, Elite Four members and other bosses, you can't go much further with the complaints. And even if you could doesn't mean you should: Frankly I almost kind of regret going as far as I did with the bitching for I know how much many people love these games and how I may have looked like a real downer/party pooper, especially since I have never actually played any version of Gen 2 myself. So after my crazed venting was done, I was ready to put this all behind me, to put this dumb little issue to bed and move on to better things. And that's exactly what happened for a short while.

And then, just yesterday while I was scrolling through Bulbapedia out of boredom for the umpteenth time, I discovered these.

1591382111026.png
1591382320201.png
1591382187380.png

Screenshot 2020-06-05 at 2.43.38 PM.png
1591382746828.png

Screenshot 2020-06-05 at 2.53.48 PM.png

These are all from the GSC/HGSS chapters of the Pokemon Adventures manga. And yes, those are indeed appropriate Johto Pokemon for each character that didn't have one, Lance even gets a Tyranitar! They're used in their battles with the player character/rival equivalents, are often their primary Pokemon and even help them in other situations! They even gave Eusine a Jumpluff! EUSINE!!!!!!

Listen, alright? I really, really don't want to add fuel to the "Game Freak is incompetent" narrative, I honestly hate that idea and don't want to add to it. But how is it possible that a mangaka (someone whose primary job is writing and illustrating a story in serialized graphic novel form, aka not a game dev) was able to make the realization of how horrid the Johto Pokemon representation is for the gym leaders as well as the appropriate fixes that the actual people working on the core games failed to do in not 1, not 2, but 3 different versions of Johto??!
 
I'm happy you elaborated a bit, but I still vehemently disagree. I dunno about you, but I really don't think games like the Dark Souls series, Sekiro, various roguelikes and the return of Megaman would've happened or done as well as they did if there was such a massive decline in players who crave a challenge. Literally one of the biggest trends in Poketubing of the past several months as of this discussion is these insane solo run challenges where people try to beat various games with shit like Ditto and Feebas. I'm sure these vids and games have sizable adult segments of their communities, but those would only be able to carry them so far, certainly not to millions upon millions of sales with backing from major companies like Bandai Namco.

Anyways I wanna wrap this up, so let's move on to... sigh

I thought this demon had been vanquished. I've voiced many times across various OI threads on how much I think GSC boss design is a disaster through a series of rants and teambuilding analyses, with one of my most consistent complaints being their refusal to take advantage of Johto's own new Pokemon.

But at a certain point, even in such a poorly-constructed host of Gym Leaders, Elite Four members and other bosses, you can't go much further with the complaints. And even if you could doesn't mean you should: Frankly I almost kind of regret going as far as I did with the bitching for I know how much many people love these games and how I may have looked like a real downer/party pooper, especially since I have never actually played any version of Gen 2 myself. So after my crazed venting was done, I was ready to put this all behind me, to put this dumb little issue to bed and move on to better things. And that's exactly what happened for a short while.

And then, just yesterday while I was scrolling through Bulbapedia out of boredom for the umpteenth time, I discovered these.


These are all from the GSC/HGSS chapters of the Pokemon Adventures manga. And yes, those are indeed appropriate Johto Pokemon for each character that didn't have one, Lance even gets a Tyranitar! They're used in their battles with the player character/rival equivalents, are often their primary Pokemon and even help them in other situations! They even gave Eusine a Jumpluff! EUSINE!!!!!!

Listen, alright? I really, really don't want to add fuel to the "Game Freak is incompetent" narrative, I honestly hate that idea and don't want to add to it. But how is it possible that a mangaka (someone whose primary job is writing and illustrating a story in serialized graphic novel form, aka not a game dev) was able to make the realization of how horrid the Johto Pokemon representation is for the gym leaders as well as the appropriate fixes that the actual people working on the core games failed to do in not 1, not 2, but 3 different versions of Johto??!
From what I've read about Adventures, it's got some wild stuff. Like, Lance is a genocidal maniac who can psychically heal and read the emotions of Pokemon. I'm pretty sure the reason the Johto gym leaders don't adhere to their in-game teams is because Adventures rarely adheres to in-game stuff just in general.
 
Speaking of Eusine, I always found it a shame you only ever battle him once. And even on the curve of "johto" he's not very tough. For as often as you run into him it definitely feels like you should be battling him mroe than once, if nothing else then at the final suicune encounter in HGSS.

And give the poor guy an animated sprite, or something.

From what I've read about Adventures, it's got some wild stuff. Like, Lance is a genocidal maniac who can psychically heal and read the emotions of Pokemon. I'm pretty sure the reason the Johto gym leaders don't adhere to their in-game teams is because Adventures rarely adheres to in-game stuff just in general.
You say that but rest assured, Adventures is bizarrely married to the idea of being as 1:1 with the games as possible about as much as it just goes off on insane wild tangents
 
From what I've read about Adventures, it's got some wild stuff. Like, Lance is a genocidal maniac who can psychically heal and read the emotions of Pokemon. I'm pretty sure the reason the Johto gym leaders don't adhere to their in-game teams is because Adventures rarely adheres to in-game stuff just in general.

Oh yeah, I'm perfectly aware of some of the ahem "interesting" diversions Adventures takes, ESPECIALLY in the earlier chapters (not only your Lance example, but also I think Pryce of all people is a sympathetic bad guy who wants to go back in time with Celebi to save a Lapras' family or something? And while not as insanely character-changing, don't even get me started on what they did to Archer in the HGSS chapters...), but as far as I can tell (as R_N alluded to) they usually stay pretty similar to the in-game teams for Gym Leaders and such. Either way, the fact a spinoff manga has better teams for them when they usually dont change stuff that much in that regard is pretty fuckin sad.
 
I'd disagree on "liking simple, substance-less things" being a New Generation thing. That happens in every era; just look at how popular The Beatles are.


These are all from the GSC/HGSS chapters of the Pokemon Adventures manga. And yes, those are indeed appropriate Johto Pokemon for each character that didn't have one, Lance even gets a Tyranitar! They're used in their battles with the player character/rival equivalents, are often their primary Pokemon and even help them in other situations! They even gave Eusine a Jumpluff! EUSINE!!!!!!

Listen, alright? I really, really don't want to add fuel to the "Game Freak is incompetent" narrative, I honestly hate that idea and don't want to add to it. But how is it possible that a mangaka (someone whose primary job is writing and illustrating a story in serialized graphic novel form, aka not a game dev) was able to make the realization of how horrid the Johto Pokemon representation is for the gym leaders as well as the appropriate fixes that the actual people working on the core games failed to do in not 1, not 2, but 3 different versions of Johto??!

Back when I read Adventures, I distinctly got the impression that the biggest thing it shared in common with the Anime was wanting to show off every new Pokémon in a gen throughout each chapter; often assigning them to major characters for that purpose. Like, Cyrus for instance gets a Probopass and Magnezone while one of the XY scientist girls wields the Honedge family. Fun thing is, it rarely comes off as random -- Cyrus' new Pokémon are to tie in directly to his interest of and studying Mt. Coronet and its energies, and Misty getting a Lanturn in the GSC chapter is about her incorporating new discoveries and type variety into her team. It's pretty neat


... it's... also kind of strange? I don't mean that in a negative way, just that usually the reason for showing off new Pokémon every episode/chapter is for marketing purposes; but due to the nature of Manga, these chapters go on for a long, long time. Like, HGSS' chapter iirc ran all the way into BW2's release. So I think it's fun that they really are just passionate about using everything new to their advantage rather than for the sake of marketing.
 
I'd disagree on "liking simple, substance-less things" being a New Generation thing. That happens in every era; just look at how popular The Beatles are.




Back when I read Adventures, I distinctly got the impression that the biggest thing it shared in common with the Anime was wanting to show off every new Pokémon in a gen throughout each chapter; often assigning them to major characters for that purpose. Like, Cyrus for instance gets a Probopass and Magnezone while one of the XY scientist girls wields the Honedge family. Fun thing is, it rarely comes off as random -- Cyrus' new Pokémon are to tie in directly to his interest of and studying Mt. Coronet and its energies, and Misty getting a Lanturn in the GSC chapter is about her incorporating new discoveries and type variety into her team. It's pretty neat


... it's... also kind of strange? I don't mean that in a negative way, just that usually the reason for showing off new Pokémon every episode/chapter is for marketing purposes; but due to the nature of Manga, these chapters go on for a long, long time. Like, HGSS' chapter iirc ran all the way into BW2's release. So I think it's fun that they really are just passionate about using everything new to their advantage rather than for the sake of marketing.
Adventures arc timing is a total mess because it ran in like 3 separate magazines at different times. BW1 was unfinished for years iirc because they kept starting the new series about in time with the games.
HGSS incidentally started & ended in 2010.


I will say though that...honestly...it feels less like "to their advantage" and more "the sake of marketing".
I'm going to keep harping on HGSS because it's just the worst offender by far but it genuinely is 19 chapters of just going down a "Wow Look At ALl These New Things!" checklist no matter how "justified" it is in-story. There is a 2 page spread dedicated to nothing but showing off Arceus's forms. Silver finds all of the Arceus plates and they're in the exact locations they are in the games and its blitzed through in like a chapter or two. Because its been like a decade since these characters were relevant every single character burns through a ton of evolutions all at once no tiem to ask questions we gotta go go go Gold you need to 100% complete the pokethalon and say hi to all the newly designed E4 members lets GO people chop chop!!!
 
I'd disagree on "liking simple, substance-less things" being a New Generation thing. That happens in every era; just look at how popular The Beatles are.
I know that outside of gaming, people often ascribe things to be deeper than they actually are. The biggest example here is Shakespeare: shameless rehashes of old books with added innuendo and puns (don't get me wrong, I like a lot of his plays, mostly because I'm a sucker for wordplay). He's noted primarily for having works that survived until present, which in the day meant poeple thought his stuff was good enough to be worth bootlegging, not that they were designed as art. In terms of video games, it's still recent enough that times are remembered, not looked at through incomplete archives. I know I started gaming partway through, but I know there were still simple games and simple players in at least 2005. But they're neither the ones that get remembered, nor the ones most likely to be favoured by the people doing the remembering. I think there have always been people not interested in something more complex, and that they may frequently be the majority (Heck, look at board games and how the most prominent ones are by far the simplest [chess's complexity is 100% metagame, not the rules themselves]), but those aren't the people who are likely to buy something ten years down the line with their own money.

In other words, a simple game is a short-term strategy while a complex game is a long-term strategy, and companies focusing on the short term is a problem that is not localized to gaming.
 
I know that outside of gaming, people often ascribe things to be deeper than they actually are. The biggest example here is Shakespeare: shameless rehashes of old books with added innuendo and puns (don't get me wrong, I like a lot of his plays, mostly because I'm a sucker for wordplay). He's noted primarily for having works that survived until present, which in the day meant poeple thought his stuff was good enough to be worth bootlegging, not that they were designed as art. In terms of video games, it's still recent enough that times are remembered, not looked at through incomplete archives. I know I started gaming partway through, but I know there were still simple games and simple players in at least 2005. But they're neither the ones that get remembered, nor the ones most likely to be favoured by the people doing the remembering. I think there have always been people not interested in something more complex, and that they may frequently be the majority (Heck, look at board games and how the most prominent ones are by far the simplest [chess's complexity is 100% metagame, not the rules themselves]), but those aren't the people who are likely to buy something ten years down the line with their own money.

In other words, a simple game is a short-term strategy while a complex game is a long-term strategy, and companies focusing on the short term is a problem that is not localized to gaming.
I’m confused by this argument- Simplicity is proven to be both profitable and popular, and very much enduring based on the examples you chose. Beyond that, you imply that complex works are more profitable over the long term, despite the fact that (outside of DLC/microtransactions for videogames or repackages/rereleases more widely), there’s not many ways to profit on something after a purchase. Additionally, accessibility is a major factor in sales. With complex and deep systems you may maintain a healthy player base ad infinitum, but I don’t really think Super Smash Brothers Melee is making much money for Nintendo. Unless that’s also only complex due to metagame? Also chess isn’t complex because of simple rules? Does everything need a hulking manual to be complex?

In other words, I’m confused. Where’s the money in this complexity approach? Why are you treating simplicity as a strictly negative factor in the long term?

(note: this doesn’t apply to Pokémon necessarily, just in general)
 
Time to air a very old annoyance of mine that I briefly mentioned in another post, as evidence that the old games weren't perfect either.

The SS Aqua. After you beat the Elite Four for the first time in GSC, it takes you from Olivine City to Vermilion City. You board the ship, are assigned a cabin where you can heal as many times as you like, and then you are free to roam the ship and battle trainers until you reach the Captain and reach your destination.

But the trainers on the SS Aqua are ... probably the worst example of GSC's level curve up to that point of the game.

The previous battle you had before boarding the SS Aqua was against Lance, at the end of the Elite Four run. His Pokémon range in level from 44 to 50, and you face him after four long battles of similarly-leveled trainers with no free healing in between. Your own Pokémon need to be at least in the mid-forties to have a chance against the Elite Four.

In contrast, the trainers on the SS Aqua have Pokémon at levels ranging from ... 26 to 33. Almost twenty levels lower than Lance. Not only that, but the levels are lower than the trainers you fought on the routes leading up to the Elite Four as well. Never mind the routes in Kanto; the trainers in Blackthorn Gym had higher levels than that (34 to 37). You have to go all the way back to before Ice Path to meet similarly weak trainers. The wild Pokémon in Victory Road are stronger than that (32 to 40).

I mean... what the heck? And these are battles where you can safely backtrack to a free healing spot after every battle too. There is almost zero way you could feasibly risk losing here. The battles are mindless click-and-win sweeps that offer no challenge unless you went and changed your whole team after beating the Pokémon League for some reason.

But what makes this so fully mind-boggling is that you can actually do rematches against the ship's trainers. You see, this is a postgame activity, and if you go tired after beating Lt. Surge (levels 40-46, not quite Lance but a decent step up nonetheless, and he has five Pokémon), you can take the ship back to Olivine and beating new trainers ...

... whose Pokémon this time rank between level 23 and 35. That one Pokémon at level 35 on the Vermilion-Olivine journey is a Jigglypuff. At least the rematch Olivine-Vermilion trip has two Cooltrainers with three Pokémon each at level 35, but it also has a Fisherman with a level 25 Remoraid and Shellder. Still weaker than those pre-Ice Path trainers.

Granted, Janine later comes along as an even worse example of level scaling (levels 33 to 39 for a Gym Leader you have to trek through half of Kanto to beat, which includes a number of route trainers stronger than her), but at least you can blame that one on the lore. The SS Aqua trainers are set up to be this challenge you can beat over and over again as a way to kill time or train Pokémon in the postgame, but their Pokémon are so ridiculously weak they don't even serve as good XP fodder to train for Elite Four rematches. I'll grant that they are a neat way for freshly caught Pokémon to be used in battle, however. I just wish the game had a little more resistance to offer for its only batch of reliably rematch-able trainers.

... and it was really disheartening to see that the trainers weren't even able to be rebattled in HGSS. While the levels have been scaled up considerably since GSC (36-41 for the first voyage, 36-43 for the second, 31-43 for the third), each trainer can only be battled once. After you have cleared out the ship on each of the voyages, you can't make rematches with anybody. And while the levels are scaled up, it's still from "laughably low" to "horribly low" and they no longer have their rematch value, so you can't even use them to train up weak new catches or grind there for the Elite Four (whose beefed-up rematch teams certainly warrant a good grinding spot).

So yeah. If the Titanic was called "the ship of dreams", then the Aqua is "the ship of epic disappointment". Its GSC iteration wasn't good, and its HGSS iteration managed to somehow be worse. Well done, 2000s-era Game Freak.
 
The effectiveness of Ground attacks. It's a mess.

Gen 1:
Flying-type Pokemon are immune to Ground-type attacks. Immediately there's a problem: not all Flying Pokemon are flying, and not all flying Pokemon are Flying. Doduo and Dodrio are immune to Ground despite being earthbound, while Pokemon like Beedrill and Magnemite are not immune to Ground despite being airborne.

Gen 2:
There is now an entry hazard, Spikes, that only damages Pokemon that aren't immune to Ground. Fine, it's like how Thunder Wave and Toxic don't work on Pokemon who are immune to Electric (Ground) or Poison (Steel).

Gen 3:
The Levitate ability is introduced, granting Ground immunity to non-Flying-type Pokemon. Same problem again: not all Levitating Pokemon are levitating, and not all levitating Pokemon are Levitating. Vibrava and Flygon aren't levitating or floating. They're flying with their wings. Meanwhile, Magnemite is still vulnerable to Ground, despite levitating through electromagnetism, and putting aside semantics between flying and levitating, Beedrill is still able to be hit with Ground attacks. The ability Arena Trap is also introduced. Plenty of abilities play with types, but Arena Trap is the only ability to ever rely on the effectiveness of a specific type.

Gens 4, 5, and 6:
Shit hits the fan. Two new entry hazards, Toxic Spikes and Sticky Web, are introduced. While it was somewhat understandable for Spikes to play on Ground effectiveness due to it itself being a Ground-type move, Toxic Spikes and Sticky Web do not have this excuse. Ingrain is modified to negate the Ground immunity of Flying and Levitate, and with it come a bevy of moves and items that manipulate Ground effectiveness. Magnet Rise, Telekinesis, and Air Balloon all grant immunity to Ground (note that unlike Worry Seed or Simple Beam, Magnet Rise and Telekinesis don't replace the target's ability with Levitate; they pull the Ground immunity out of nowhere) while Gravity, Smack Down, Thousand Arrows, and Iron Ball remove immunities to Ground. Oddly, Roost is not among them, as it will not remove the Ground immunity of Levitate or any other source of immunity other than Flying. Terrains and Rototiller join the ranks of things that don't affect Pokemon with Ground immunity. Finally, the situation is further complicated by Ring Target and inverse battles. These allow Flying-type Pokemon to be hit by Ground-type attacks, but leaves them unaffected by the likes of terrains and non-stealthy entry hazards, meaning that Spikes is also robbed of the excuse that it doesn't affect Flying-types because it's a Ground move (Steel-types have since become inherently immune to the poison status, and Thunder Wave can hit Ground-types with the aid of Ring Target or inverse battles).

Ground effectiveness was originally tied to Flying and Levitate, and while the implementation was beyond clunky, it was at least simple and easy to understand. But today, Ground effectiveness is a clusterfuck. Moves and items have been introduced to divorce Ground effectiveness from typing and ability (which is good), but Flying and Levitate still linger.

Remove Flying's immunity to Ground. Remove Levitate entirely. Have Ground effectiveness be an intrinsic feature of any Pokemon who is determined to airborne (i.e. most Flying-types that aren't Doduo, Dodrio, and Galarian Zapdos, as well as Pokemon like Flygon, Beedrill, and Magnemite). Add Roost to the list of things that directly affect Ground effectiveness. It may seem arbitrary, but at least then Ground effectiveness would be consistent.
 
I've felt for a while that ground contact should be decoupled from Type and Ability completely for Pokémon. Would it be a nightmare to code/consider? Yeah, probably. Would it make more logical sense? Also yes.

In defense of Toxic Spikes, at least, they're pretty clearly some form of poison... coated? infused? comprised??? caltrops, so it makes sense for them to only affect grounded opponents. Not sure why Poison-types absorb them, though.
 
At this point I wouldn't even say Flying is immune to Ground anymore. Roost, Smack Down, Thousand Arrows, Gravity and other effects that remove the "Airborne" status also allow Ground-type moves to hit Flying-type Pokémon.

I'd say Flying merely gives the user a passive Airborne status, and is otherwise made to take neutral damage from Ground-type moves. Same with Levitate.

I would keep all the existing interactions for Ground-type moves, and instead change the context around it. Namely:
- Have something or someone state in-game that the Flying-type is an element that is often, but not necessarily related to the act of flying. There are many Flying-type moves not related to flying to begin with (e.g. Hurricane, Aerial Ace, Bounce), so it could be easy to justify. This would solve the issue of Airborne Flying-type Pokémon that cannot fly, and that Flying, as an intrinsic trait of the element, renders the Pokémon impervious of whatever effect is on the ground beneath their feet (the aforementioned Airborne condition), even if they are actually touching the ground.
- Change Levitate's condition to "This Pokémon is Airborne", and then, in the status screen, add an "Airborne" entry that states "This Pokémon is immune to Ground-type moves, as well as the effects of Arena Trap, Spikes, Toxic Spikes and Sticky Web set on the battlefield.". The Airborne entry can be applied to the effects of moves like Telekinesis and the aforementioned Flying-type, as well.
 
Last edited:
With how many passive interactions there are now, having a "trait" screen would probably genuinely useful. Then they could add "airborne" as an innate trait to a bunch of Pokemon at the same time to sort of showcase the feature, like siggu suggests.
Hell that could even be a slight shake up if they decide to really run with it. Have some traits that are basically like an ability, but more limited in scope and available innately to all members of that species. That could be a fun shake up to the meta depending on what traits they come up with for what pokemon (or a disaster! Either way)

I mean lets put aside how we'd like this feature to go. It'd be nice to know at a glance on a status screen that ah, right, grass types are immune to powder moves, ghosts are immune to trapping, and so on.
 
At this point I wouldn't even say Flying is immune to Ground anymore. Roost, Smack Down, Thousand Arrows, Gravity and other effects that remove the "Airborne" status also allow Ground-type moves to hit Flying-type Pokémon.

I'd say Flying merely gives the user a passive Airborne status, and is otherwise made to take neutral damage from Ground-type moves.
I'd agree... if not for Ring Target and inverse battles. A Pidgey will be damaged by Earthquake if holding a Ring Target, and will take twice that damage in an inverse battle, but it will still avoid Spike damage in both instances. And Roost doesn't directly remove the airborne status, it can only indirectly remove it by removing the Flying type. A Roosting Latias is still immune to Earthquake.

It's like Flying is immune to Ground in the normal type sense, but then also has an inherent airborne status just like how Ghost has an inherent trapping immunity, but for some reason this airborne status is different from the regular airborne status because it doesn't apply to direct attacks. Either that, or the airborne status doesn't actually defend against Ground attacks at all, and all the moves, items, and abilities that grant or remove the airborne status also independently grant or remove an immunity to Ground attacks, like how Miracle Eye removes immunity to Psychic.
 
Hi innate traits that have an effect on gameplay would be an absolute nightmare both for returning and new players unless they are immediately and always obvious. We have over 900 Pokemon at this point in time. Memorizing which ones have specific innate effects is a nightmare and a half - and of course that's assuming consistency. I'm willing to bet that a lot of the people reading through this would struggle to name already existing traits of some Pokemon like what their HA is. There were people tripped up by which Pokemon were eligible for Sky Battles back in XY, and that 'airborne' status is exactly what you're talking about here. Here's a question - do you remember off the top of your head whether or not Volcarona is eligible for Sky Battles?

This is of course in addition to the fact that this would be a massive nerf to Ground-types offensively, something they don't really need, considering just how many hits Ground-type has taken. Levitate, an ability solely dedicated to destroying that type, is one of the most common abilities in the entire series.

Type based immunities are already a bit of a pain to remember (like Ghost-type immunity to trapping moves and abilities), do we really need to make things more annoying to keep track of?
 
I'd agree... if not for Ring Target and inverse battles. A Pidgey will be damaged by Earthquake if holding a Ring Target, and will take twice that damage in an inverse battle, but it will still avoid Spike damage in both instances. And Roost doesn't directly remove the airborne status, it can only indirectly remove it by removing the Flying type. A Roosting Latias is still immune to Earthquake.
To be fair, inverse battles havent been in last 3 titles, and I'm not even sure items like Ring Target exist and/or are functional in SwSh so...
 
Hi innate traits that have an effect on gameplay would be an absolute nightmare both for returning and new players unless they are immediately and always obvious. We have over 900 Pokemon at this point in time. Memorizing which ones have specific innate effects is a nightmare and a half - and of course that's assuming consistency. I'm willing to bet that a lot of the people reading through this would struggle to name already existing traits of some Pokemon like what their HA is. There were people tripped up by which Pokemon were eligible for Sky Battles back in XY, and that 'airborne' status is exactly what you're talking about here. Here's a question - do you remember off the top of your head whether or not Volcarona is eligible for Sky Battles?

This is of course in addition to the fact that this would be a massive nerf to Ground-types offensively, something they don't really need, considering just how many hits Ground-type has taken. Levitate, an ability solely dedicated to destroying that type, is one of the most common abilities in the entire series.

Type based immunities are already a bit of a pain to remember (like Ghost-type immunity to trapping moves and abilities), do we really need to make things more annoying to keep track of?
I don't think it would be very hard to remember. It isn't like Ghost's immunity to trapping, Grass's immunity to powders, and Dark's immunity to Prankster, where the immunity is some random thing you need to memorize. 90% of the time, remembering an inherent airborne trait would be as simple as "Is the Pokemon's model literally airborne? If yes, it's inherently airborne." That remaining 10% is all the fish Pokemon who are shown to be floating because the alternative looks really dumb.

And it would actually make Sky Battle eligibility easier to remember. Contrary to what any remotely logical person would think, airborne status actually has nothing to do with Sky Battles. These are the criteria for Sky Battle eligibility:
  1. The Pokemon has either a Flying type or Levitate as its ability in its base form (i.e. you can still Mega Evolve Charizard to its X form)
  2. The Pokemon's model is not touching the ground
I only know this off the top of my head because I've ripped into how stupid this format is a few times in the past. The person who reasonably assumes Volcarona is allowed in Sky Battles because it's constantly flying in place with its six massive wings should be right.


EDIT: Oh yeah.
I'm not even sure items like Ring Target exist and/or are functional in SwSh so...
Stow-on-Side bargain shop.
 
Back
Top