Unpopular opinions

[pika pal]

Hell Bulbasaur was popular despite several years of not deciding if it was a Dinosaur or a Frog.

I also think the simplest way to circumvent the Ice area thing described would be to implement some kind of travel point or detour in the story, like how B2W2 has you cut through the middle of Unova part way through, or Alola having chunks with the Islands; Galar was in a prime position to do this with the Wild Area and potentially open-ended progression akin to what people praise mid-game Johto for opening. That or go further with Platinum's concept and just make the region at large relatively cold/up north so that a Snow/Ice area isn't an out of the way location geographically.

 

[Hugin]

You could also do something like the Slumbering Weald. Have an early area that's home to a legendary ice-type, where a constant blizzard makes travel impossible, but there does happen to be one patch of grass early on. The fact that it's so much colder than it should be and clearly important gives players something to look forwards to, but the grass gives them a couple odd types right away.

Or heck, just give us the ice equivalent of Mareep or whatever. There's always at least one early mon of an unusual type, make it ice this time.

 

[Galvanatic]

I think a dash of personality is welcome in a design, like these bangers from Gen 1:

But doing the "job" route is when a mon stops being a creature with a default temperament and more like a person.

Like, having a friendly Cubone or a mean Dragonair is okay and charming in a subversive way, but having a social Inteleon or a Gumshoos with basic decency feels like they're going against they're "profession." If that makes any sense?

GF needs to embrace the concept of ~dex filler~ more, like they used to, and trust that people will get attached to any new mon even if it doesn't have a built-in endearing personality or a weird prop it has to lug around or, like, a human job.

Dex filler mons tend to feel more like actual living creatures that fit into their ecosystems and form their own communities.

As much as people rag on the Lumineons of the world, I think a lot of Gen 8's "simpler" mons like Pincurchin, Dubwool and Drednaw were a breath of fresh air compared to the previous gen's obsession with anthropomorphization. There ought to be a balance in the future; I'm praying Lechonk just evolves into a cool pig.

I think this can also be extended into mons having special attributes in general. Complexity bloat is real and it seems like they're introducing more unique mechanics faster than they're making them commonplace (which defeats the "GF's testing this mechanic on this one mon" argument).

For a mapping example, consider the persistent problem of the Ice area being late. For it to be earlier, it needs to be nearby the starting area. The starting area needs to have a large number of towns close together because shorter routes are part of the difficulty curve. In reality, the places next to the tundra or mountaintops are less inhabited than plains and coasts the cowards. So a region that follows a real location will have the Ice area far from the starting area, inherently making it later in the game.

I don't get why Ice mons need to be locked to icy regions, anyway. Fire Pokemon are found all over the world. An icy mon in a cave or a deciduous forest would be reasonable.

Maybe it's because the freeze mechanics are too much for the early game?

 

[Samtendo09]

GF needs to embrace the concept of ~dex filler~ more, like they used to, and trust that people will get attached to any new mon even if it doesn't have a built-in endearing personality or a weird prop it has to lug around or, like, a human job.

Dex filler mons tend to feel more like actual living creatures that fit into their ecosystems and form their own communities.

As long as the dex fillers actually have something going for them, otherwise people would dismiss them as generic or worse, and it happened to Pokémon like Volbeat + Illumise, Lickitung (prior or even arguably after Gen 4) Carnivine, Stonjourner, several one-stagers in Gen 2, the Surskit line, the Red and Blue forms of Basculin, Ducklett line, Seel line, the list goes on.

Not saying all dex fillers as misses, as we can see with Zangoose + Seviper, the Helioptile line, plenty of Alola’s one-stagers, and Falinks and the Snom line despite the latter’s own shortcomings. But they definitely need to be more crafty or careful with the dex fillers if they don’t want people to see too many of them as “waste of spaces”.

Maybe it's because the freeze mechanics are too much for the early game?

Yeah, I think that might be why GF is so hesitant to put Ice-type Pokémon in early routes in their games. But if that‘s the case, they should have revamped Freeze or strike a middle ground, makes a one-time flinch and then works like Frostbite in subsequent turns.

Complexity bloat in general is also an increasing problem, and it often ends up making Pokémon with such an unnecessary and obstructive “special” attributes that it loops back to being boring.

 

[Nitro Indigo]

a social Inteleon

I'm reminded of a fanfic which had a wisecracking Inteleon as a supporting character. Also, funny that you mentioned Pinchurchin, which is a fan-favourite because of its simple design. (Or at least, it gets grouped with the fan-favourite Snom a lot.)

 

[Cobalt Empoleon]

As long as the dex fillers actually have something going for them, otherwise people would dismiss them as generic or worse, and it happened to Pokémon like Volbeat + Illumise, Lickitung (prior or even arguably after Gen 4) Carnivine, Stonjourner, several one-stagers in Gen 2, the Surskit line, the Red and Blue forms of Basculin, Ducklett line, Seel line, the list goes on.

Not saying all dex fillers as misses, as we can see with Zangoose + Seviper, the Helioptile line, plenty of Alola’s one-stagers, and Falinks and the Snom line despite the latter’s own shortcomings. But they definitely need to be more crafty or careful with the dex fillers if they don’t want people to see too many of them as “waste of spaces”.

The difficulty with these types of discussions is that we all seem to be working with different definitions of 'dex filler' and to some extent we all project our own opinions of individual Pokemon onto the fanbase as a whole. Like, as far as I'm aware a lot of people really really like Seel and Dewgong, despite them being basically invisible in later gens and totally outclassed in battle, but maybe that's just me thinking 'but I like Seel!' and assuming everyone else does too.

In general though, my point was more that they shouldn't even bother putting special effort into making every dex filler mon appealing to as many people as possible. For most new Pokemon, a no-frills concept executed nicely will inevitably garner a small but devoted fanbase, even if it's forgettable to most of us and accomplishes nothing in battle. Giving everything something to make it stand out leads to the kind of messy design philosophy we have now (best exemplified imo by the massive surge in the number of abilities that can't be swapped, copied or suppressed in later gens).

 

[CPU]

I can defend some of the more overtly-humanoid, personality-focused designs; i think they have their place. Tsareena, for example, is a bit of a pun on mangosteens being called "the queen of fruits." No comment on it evolving by knowing Stomp, though.

(Its "king of fruits" equivalent would be the durian, by the way.)

 

[Nitro Indigo]

All-male regional variant of Tsareena based on the durian confirmed? =P Or does Ferrothorn count as a durian?

 

[DrPumpkinz]

The counterpart to Tsareena being based on what is infamously the grossest and smelliest fruit would be hilarious and also uncomfortably appropriate.

 

[Nitro Indigo]

With all this being said, I still think Pokémon has good creature designs overall because they're not something you'd see anywhere else. Once I saw a fairy wren Fakemon that was just a cartoony fairy wren, the end, with nothing unique about it.

 

[Sonikku A]

Honestly it's hard to say
Already by Gen 2 the overall Pokemon design philosophy drastically changed. Just look at Pidgey vs Hoothoot, or Caterpie vs Ledyba. One's a lot less cartoony than the other!
On the other hand, you had cartoony ducks/platypi like Psyduck Gen 1, vs the regal Kingdra Gen 2, so exceptions exist

Personally, I feel GF need to do multiple things for a mon;
-Figure habitat for mons. Gen 1 notably did well for this (though inner city pollution was a bit skewed in poison rep), as did Gen 3. On the other hand, 2 and 4 did very badly at bits (seriously, where can Slugma be in Johto- Magmar in Sinn-oh wait...). Environment focus can lead to less inappropriate designs for specie adaptation
-Not focus so much on personality. Cubone was a failure on that front from both a logical and moral standpoint, but it just genericfies YOUR mon to someone elses otherwise. Ambiguity helps beasts
-Realize cute can be generic. Pikaclones are the prime example of this
-hyper basic shapes shouldn't define the mon. Voltorb is laughed at nowadays for a reason
-Going to the next point, break trends of early route mons, and stop repetitive quotas. Both for habitat and type
-be aware of type diversity of your new mon dex
-move away from hyper contemporary food designs. Surprised Vanillite's reception didn't deter it
-Don't dumb down wacky creatures if used for reference. Snom generifies the Jewel Caterpillar a lot

-Heck, give obscure plants, animals, or even mythological legends some rep. Fossil mons did a lot for that
-Don't be afriad if some designs are plainer and more realistic than others. It's impossible to have a wacky dex for over 50 designs anyway during dev crunch

Pincurchin > Snom anyway

 

[CPU]

-Not focus so much on personality. Cubone was a failure on that front from both a logical and moral standpoint, but it just genericfies YOUR mon to someone elses otherwise. Ambiguity helps beasts

I think "personality" is only an issue when it impacts the same sort of Pokémon for multiple generations (we've had full sets of highly anthropomorphized evolved starters for 3 straight gens now, arguably starting as early as gen 4). Human traits can be used to define a 'mon and its attributes when designing it but shouldn't detract from its final design and other inspirations.

-Realize cute can be generic. Pikaclones are the prime example of this
-hyper basic shapes shouldn't define the mon. Voltorb is laughed at nowadays for a reason

I wasn't going to respond to the Pikaclone point but then I decided that these two points feel a bit contradictory. Pikaclones are also composed of basic shapes. Simple body plans. Cuter Pokémon tend to be simpler in shape and design (this extends to a lot of art styles and other creature designs too). Obviously Voltorb and Electrode are an extreme example, but they are as simple as they are because they're mimicking Pokéballs. They fill the "RPG item chest mimic" role; making them more complex kind of ruins the gimmick (to wit, Foongus is believable but pretending that my character would actually be fooled by an Amoonguss seems nonsensical). Sure, Voltorb and Electrode aren't exactly cute, which might ruin my comparison here, but their simplicity is part of their design.

-move away from hyper contemporary food designs. Surprised Vanillite's reception didn't deter it

This sounds like a charged opinion; I think food Pokémon are funny and a good addition. (Quite surprised that Applin got no coverage before SwSh released.) I will concede the point, though, that it's important to make sure you can play up aspects of the food you're basing the Pokémon off of. To me, Milcery and Alcremie fail a bit here because there isn't really anything about them that references their food inspiration, at least going by moves. Their Abilities do, but otherwise they feel like a generic Fairy Pokémon that is cream-based just for a gameplay (evolution) gimmick.

-Don't dumb down wacky creatures if used for reference. Snom generifies the Jewel Caterpillar a lot

I would agree with you here... if Frosmoth kept the jewel caterpillar's normal life cycle in mind. But it doesn't. (It's pretty weird.) The real life animal looks like a good candidate for an Ice-type but it loses that as it matures, so they took the larval form and gave it a Pokémon-y evolution that plays up the typing.

-Heck, give obscure plants, animals, or even mythological legends some rep. Fossil mons did a lot for that

Maybe I'm probably not the best person to ask about this--my interest in nature and animals has probably been influenced by Pokémon--but there are a lot of Pokémon that pull from obscure (or at least uncommon) organisms and myths (granted, the latter mostly focuses on Japanese/other Asian myths) that the average person probably wouldn't be all that familiar with.

Just going through gens 1 and 2 in my head, we have:
-mythological salamander
-pika
-pangolin
-rafflesia
-cordyceps
-tadpoles with visible innards (is this common for tadpoles?)
-pitcher plants
-tapirs/Baku
-stag and hercules beetles
-carp becoming a flying serpent
-loch ness monster/plesiosaur
-trilobites
-ammonites
-anglerfish (a very cutesy version)
-axolotl/giant salamander
-banshee
-weedy sea dragon
-tsuchinoko
-remoras (I had a shark-focused unit in school when younger so I don't really know if these are common knowledge or not lol)
-kamaitachi
-bagworms
-capoeira (not an organism but a direct inspiration for hitmontop)

Gen 2 was decidedly "safer" with the design inspirations but there were still plenty of uncommon, mythological organisms used as inspiration. I have also heard that what animals are uncommonly referenced in the west does not necessarily line up with what's uncommon in Japan, so keep that in mind as well.

 

[Nitro Indigo]

capoeira (not an organism but a direct inspiration for hitmontop)

Interesting you brought that up, because the Hitmons are the kind of Pokémon that are less based on one particular physical thing, and more like an anthropomorphic concept.

 

[Hugin]

I think there's a lot of people with a lot of different opinions on what should be done with mon designs. My big thing: Fewer 'required by tradition' mons. We've got a dozen early route normals, small round birds, and 3-stage bugs, we don't need more. Either reuse the existing ones or just come up with something different. They're crowding the dex with stuff that is new but doesn't stand out, and that gets annoying.

 

[Sonikku A]

Hitmontop makes me sad, cuz the initial designs were way weirder in SW97 and the later scratchpad design
Final looks like a preevo somehow...

I wasn't going to respond to the Pikaclone point but then I decided that these two points feel a bit contradictory. Pikaclones are also composed of basic shapes. Simple body plans. Cuter Pokémon tend to be simpler in shape and design (this extends to a lot of art styles and other creature designs too).

When I noted Pikaclone, I meant them being a negative point. A lot of them are generic for that reason

This sounds like a charged opinion; I think food Pokémon are funny and a good addition. (Quite surprised that Applin got no coverage before SwSh released.) I will concede the point, though, that it's important to make sure you can play up aspects of the food you're basing the Pokémon off of. To me, Milcery and Alcremie fail a bit here because there isn't really anything about them that references their food inspiration, at least going by moves. Their Abilities do, but otherwise they feel like a generic Fairy Pokémon that is cream-based just for a gameplay (evolution) gimmick.

Admittedly I like Applin/Flapple, but a plain apple isn't a manmade contemporary thing, along with the latter warping it to be psuedo wings
Appletun being pie on the other hand is fairly contemporary/man made and the eyes flopping don't help
Alcremies REAL issue is being the "catch all my variations" mon with obnoxious methods

One could make the argument for robots, but a lot aren't contemporary/based on existing products except Magnemite and Voltorb. Something I'm glad Magnezone fixed for the former

But it is all opinion, so there's that :P

 

[Sonikku A]

I think there's a lot of people with a lot of different opinions on what should be done with mon designs. My big thing: Fewer 'required by tradition' mons. We've got a dozen early route normals, small round birds, and 3-stage bugs, we don't need more. Either reuse the existing ones or just come up with something different. They're crowding the dex with stuff that is new but doesn't stand out, and that gets annoying.

It gets me Poocheyena was the exception early gens, being dark typed, but was complained about when Gen 3 came out :V
Interestingly, dark became secondary after 5 brought more dark early route mons

 

[Nitro Indigo]

I'm starting to wonder if the marketing department orders them to make Pikaclones.

 

[Samtendo09]

I'm starting to wonder if the marketing department orders them to make Pikaclones.

If that’s the case, chance that GF aren’t always happy with the result and somehow always half-arsed it. Pachirisu may be a mon for a VGC champion, but even that have problems in-game. Togedemaru is decent enough but that’s an exception.

I doubt Pawmi would be exception, unless this one miracously gets an evolution to break the old, tiresome trend.

 

[Bakugames]

I feel like there's a balance between a pokemon being so generic and lame it's laughable (pidgey line, rattata) and it being so humanoid and specific it's a bit weird (inteleon, cinderace)

Imo, I think an implied personality is okay and not a big deal. Animals irl are docile or aggressive, social or loners. Pokémon just decided to bring other more humanoid emotions to make their critters appealing, and that's fine. The overly human executions are what bugs people, honestly. I don't think people would care as much if inteleon was a sassy mon if it wasn't also a humanoid spy. No one gives a shit about cubone being trapped in depression forever because it's a lizard, beyond people who think nitpicking about cubone is somehow new or interesting criticism and not beating the bones of a horse who died 50 years ago.

I think the middle term is you can keep human concepts in too, just translate them into more natural, monstery designs. Instead of making them human-shaped, play with various sources, the shape of an animal, the mythology behind it (or similar creatures), the patterns it has, etc. I think having clear themes and concepts makes a design stronger, you just have to know the balance between humanoid and monster.

Snagged some of my old redesigns that had very human concepts as an example of what I'm talking about because god knows I can't explain shit. Don't look at them for too long i swear to god ok these are almost a year old

 

[Hugin]

If that’s the case, chance that GF aren’t always happy with the result and somehow always half-arsed it. Pachirisu may be a mon for a VGC champion, but even that have problems in-game. Togedemaru is decent enough but that’s an exception.

I doubt Pawmi would be exception, unless this one miracously gets an evolution to break the old, tiresome trend.

I don't think they half-ass it, I think the rules of making a pika-clone make it impossible to make a good one.

Hide

Marill(questionable, I will be ignoring it in my analysis because I think it was invented before the rules were)
Plusle/Minun
Pachirisu
Emolga
Dedenne
Togedemaru
Morpeko

So, what do these mons have in common? Available early, cute blobs, electric typing, don't evolve, often showcase a specific gimmick for their generation. Oh, and they all suck. Now, none of that is 100%. Togedemaru and Morpeko are available later and, notably, Togedemaru isn't awful. And as Pachirisu proves, every mon can have a weird niche use. But I think the rules from marketing* are that the gen needs to have a pikaclone that's available early(so players see it a lot), doesn't evolve(so that it stays as a singular identity for merch purposes), and is a cute(marketable) electric type(tradition).

And if something is available early, it's stats should suck. And if it doesn't evolve, it's stats will permanently suck. There's ways around that, but they take a lot of work. I think GF mostly does the best they can with the pikaclones and doesn't worry about how good they are. I'm not sure why, you'd think the theoretical kid they're worried about playing will get annoyed when his Dedenne is getting one-shot every time he sends it out against the E4, but that seems to not matter to GF.

Notably, compare Yamper/Mareep/Shinx to the PikaClones. They're none of them great by competitive standards, but you can take any in-game and be perfectly happy with the performance the majority of the time. Can't say that for Minun et al. That's because they're allowed to evolve, and therefore have useful stats.

*I don't think it's literally from marketing, I suspect it's creative culture there that this is needed for the game/merch to succeed, and creatives still want to get paid.

 

[Samtendo09]

I don't think they half-ass it, I think the rules of making a pika-clone make it impossible to make a good one.

Hide

Marill(questionable, I will be ignoring it in my analysis because I think it was invented before the rules were)
Plusle/Minun
Pachirisu
Emolga
Dedenne
Togedemaru
Morpeko

So, what do these mons have in common? Available early, cute blobs, electric typing, don't evolve, often showcase a specific gimmick for their generation. Oh, and they all suck. Now, none of that is 100%. Togedemaru and Morpeko are available later and, notably, Togedemaru isn't awful. And as Pachirisu proves, every mon can have a weird niche use. But I think the rules from marketing* are that the gen needs to have a pikaclone that's available early(so players see it a lot), doesn't evolve(so that it stays as a singular identity for merch purposes), and is a cute(marketable) electric type(tradition).

And if something is available early, it's stats should suck. And if it doesn't evolve, it's stats will permanently suck. There's ways around that, but they take a lot of work. I think GF mostly does the best they can with the pikaclones and doesn't worry about how good they are. I'm not sure why, you'd think the theoretical kid they're worried about playing will get annoyed when his Dedenne is getting one-shot every time he sends it out against the E4, but that seems to not matter to GF.

Notably, compare Yamper/Mareep/Shinx to the PikaClones. They're none of them great by competitive standards, but you can take any in-game and be perfectly happy with the performance the majority of the time. Can't say that for Minun et al. That's because they're allowed to evolve, and therefore have useful stats.

*I don't think it's literally from marketing, I suspect it's creative culture there that this is needed for the game/merch to succeed, and creatives still want to get paid.

That’s understandable from a marketing standpoint, but WTH with the fact that they shouldn’t evolve in the first place? If anything, just because Pikachu managed to overshadow Raichu on the marketing, doesn’t mean it will also be true between a Pika Clone and a potential evolution.

It’s not like children are likely to switch over Pikachu or Raichu into one of the Pika Clones since the latter are unlikely to be useful in the long run to begin with. And imagine the heartbreaking disappointment when many children discover that the cute lookalike turns out to be nearly unusable in most situations because of low stats and worse, not able to really improve due to lack of evolution or similar compensations…

There must be something really insincere about this trend at this rate. It’s no wonder the reputation of each Pika Clone being real shaky around the world, though at least Dedenne hold the small but important-to-note distinction to overshadow Pikachu in terms of popularity in multiple Asian countries, especially in Japan where Pokémon is born. I’m not sure why, but it‘s likely that the Pokémon Anime during the XY and XYZ seasons that made people in these countries loving this rodent in particular.

 

[Sonikku A]

Pikachu's popularity in general makes me wonder why they bother having Pikaclones. Nothing prevents them from just reusing Pikachu
If the designers want to that'd be fine...but why?

 

[Hugin]

That’s understandable from a marketing standpoint, but WTH with the fact that they shouldn’t evolve in the first place? If anything, just because Pikachu managed to overshadow Raichu on the marketing, doesn’t mean it will also be true between a Pika Clone and a potential evolution.

I don't think it's overshadow, so much as "don't compete with yourself". Give it one design that goes on plushes, shirts, candy bars, etc. If there's 2 forms then there's people who will prefer one or the other, and suddenly you need to make twice as many types of merch for similar sales.

There must be something really insincere about this trend at this rate. It’s no wonder the reputation of each Pika Clone being real shaky around the world, though at least Dedenne hold the small but important-to-note distinction to overshadow Pikachu in terms of popularity in multiple Asian countries, especially in Japan where Pokémon is born. I’m not sure why, but it‘s likely that the Pokémon Anime during the XY and XYZ seasons that made people in these countries loving this rodent in particular.

Oh, it's totally insincere. Like, I think the early route bug/bird/etc are because they genuinely think those are good for gameplay, and the fossils being mid-game or later rock-types is a part of their world design, but the pika-clones are purely about money. Designers like to eat, so they include some merch-bait. See also the animal sidekicks in every Disney movie.

And then the fandom latches on to some other completely random mon and the company has to scramble to catch up.

 

[Celever]

Pikaclones evolving has already been tested with Pichu tbh. Pichu was pushed as the mascot of a primary Gen II gameplay evolution (breeding), found its way into smash (Melee) shortly after the release of Gen II, and had huge anime prominence with the Pichu Bros. shorts, and... it really isn't that popular. Like it's for sure well-liked, something like Spiky-Eared Ukulele Pichu being the mascot of its own spinoff game is possible, but it's far from a franchise mascot despite being cuter than Pikachu and honestly having more personality than Pikachu as well. Not than Ash's Pikachu, but in its general design if you haven't watched the anime.

At the end of the day, why would Grandma buy a Pichu plushy instead of a Pikachu one. Grandma knows who Pikachu is, that one sat next to it on the shelf looks bootlegged to her. Its ears are too big and its tail too small!

Wiiiiiiith that said, while I believe that's the precedent and rationale being used, I don't think it should preclude Pikaclones from evolving. Most of the time, evolutionary lines have one clear standout that people love more than the other mons in the line enough that putting all the merch eggs into that basket is fine. Loads of people like Luxray more than Shinx, but Luxray merch has always been pretty niche, whereas Shinx merch was everywhere when I was like 8 years old. On the other hand, you couldn't find a Starly or Staravia for your life but Staraptor was also on every shelf. And for completionist's sake, I'm sure I've seen more Skiploom merch in my life than Hoppip or Jumpluff, so middle evolutions can even get that big break too. It's totally fair to give Pikaclones an evolution so that they have legitimate gameplay scale over the course of Timmy's adventure and don't end up in the PC, while also pushing only one of the designs enough to become iconic. That's exactly what they did with Pikachu, and it seems that one worked out pretty great.

 

[Cobalt Empoleon]

Idk I find this line of discussion a little weird. The fact that later pikaclones generally haven't matched Pikachu's popularity doesn't mean they're failures as designs, and the last thing I want is for every mon to be generically and accessibly strong in-game.

I'm also not sure why we're assuming that the pikaclones specifically are cynical cashgrabs, while everything else is a carefully-considered element of balancing and game design. Maybe the designers are hoping that players will persist with a weaker mon, not in the hope of it getting stronger to 'reward' them for their patience, but because they're genuinely attached to it. And for all we know, designing the new pikaclone might be a coveted job each generation. We have no real knowledge of where each species lies on the spectrum from passion project to throwaway 'merch bait' (or whatever you want to call it).

Another evolving pikaclone would be cool, but I wouldn't want it to be too much of a secret powerhouse.

What's interesting about the pikaclones to me is that their utility moves make them really good in Pokemon (fan)games that emphasise more strategic play. If all you want out of a Pokemon game is to click the super-effective move and OHKO every opponent, then they'll never be good, but there's a lot of potential in the pikaclones if the games pivot to a different battle design, like they sorta did with Totem Pokemon.