Unpopular opinions

Unpopular opinions, huh? Well, here goes.

Adding 150-odd pokemon in Gen5 was the biggest mistake GameFreak has ever made. Quantity does NOT equal quality, and thank the Maker (Arceus?) they realized it in Gen6. Too many similar Pokemon, with no real distinguishing marks between them (Swellow's... faster than Fearow? Garbador... is like Muk but designed creatively?) has always been a problem as the generations march on, and the upper limit on how many Pokemon could possibly exist in a greater metagame (say, 1,000) is being approached too quickly. It doesn't matter that I like many of the Gen5 pokes more than their Gen1 equivalent, the design trend of adding more new Pokemon each generation (peaking Gen5) put the game's future at risk.

Gen6 hit the perfect balance, with enough new Pokemon to excite people that actually had relevance by the endgame, adding Fairy to older Pokemon to make them more relevant (though IMHO they missed a bet not adding Fairy to Vanillish line), and realizing they didn't HAVE to keep to 'design traditions' like legendary trios or Fire/Fighting starter or Normal/Flying pokemon. (Seriously, I like Emboar, but there's no reason I can see for adding another Fire/Fighting starter other than "we did it the last two generations...")

You don't NEED a ton of new Pokemon to provide variety in gameplay; simply varying the Pokemon available early on works pretty damned well. B2/W2 proved that amply by having different Pokemon available in the beginning areas. It's the only game where I've used a Riolu AS a Riolu, or Growlithe AS a Growlithe, trying to balance my need for a powerful Arcanine versus expanding Hawtdawg's movepool before evolution.

I like Mega evolutions (I was sold the moment I realized the jpn version of Gardevoir's Megastone is "sirnitenite," hehe) but they're already overexending them somewhat. How many new Mega-evolutions can we realistically be expected to use?
 
I don't even know if this is unpopular or not but most baby Pokémon from a gameplay mechanic standpoint are the most worthless, useless thing ever devised.
Adding a pre-evolution to something, in my opinion, should only happen if it's a means to get a powerful Pokémon early on without being overpowered. A perfect example of this would be Gen 4's Budew - Roselia is far too powerful to have early on, so giving it a pre-evolution works as you get a partner to bond with the whole game that eventually grows into the powerhouse Roserade. Another good example for the same reason are Magby and Elekid in BW2.

But for the most part they are completely and utterly pointless. Togepi and Riolu can get a free pass since they were introduced the same gen as their evos; but otherwise, what's the need? Pichu, Igglybuff and Cleffa make no sense because their evolutions are obtained early game anyway, Magby, Elekid and Smoochum would have been fine if it wasn't for the fact that there's no way to get them early game until Elekid and Magby in BW2, and even then Level 30 is probably too high, Azurill is pointless for the same reason as Pichu, and Chingling, Mime Jr., Bonsly, Munchlax, Happiny and Mantyke just feel... incredibly pointless. They're either not notable powerhouses or, in the case of Munchlax, don't actually fit this bill because Snorlax is traditionally a sort of mid-boss Pokémon.

There are of course two I haven't mentioned so far but are fine to me for varying reason. Tyrogue because it does something unique that hasn't been seen in the franchise since; it connects to previously unrelated Pokémon via evolutionary paths and gives an Eevee-like choice. This works. Wynaut also gets a free pass purely on the merit of it's name. I fucking love that thing.
 
Last edited:
Kurona said:
I don't even know if this is unpopular or not but most baby Pokémon from a gameplay mechanic standpoint are the most worthless, useless thing ever devised.
Adding a pre-evolution to something, in my opinion, should only happen if it's a means to get a powerful Pokémon early on without being overpowered. A perfect example of this would be Gen 4's Budew - Roselia is far too powerful to have early on, so giving it a pre-evolution works as you get a partner to bond with the whole game that eventually grows into the powerhouse Roserade. Another good example for the same reason are Magby and Elekid in BW2.

But for the most part they are completely and utterly pointless. Togepi and Riolu can get a free pass since they were introduced the same gen as their evos; but otherwise, what's the need? Pichu, Igglybuff and Cleffa make no sense because their evolutions are obtained early game anyway, Magby, Elekid and Smoochum would have been fine if it wasn't for the fact that there's no way to get them early game until Elekid and Magby in BW2, and even then Level 30 is probably too high, Azurill is pointless for the same reason as Pichu, and Chingling, Mime Jr., Bonsly, Munchlax, Mantyke, Happiny and Mantyke just feel... incredibly pointless.

There are of course two I haven't mentioned so far but are fine to me for varying reason. Tyrogue because it does something unique that hasn't been seen in the franchise since; it connects to previously unrelated Pokémon via evolutionary paths and gives an Eevee-like choice. This works. Wynaut also gets a free pass purely on the merit of it's name. I fucking love that thing.
Click to expand...
Magby, Elekid, and Smoochum can be obtained from the special egg in Crystal before you fight Whitney so they're kinda like Budew for Crystal.
 
I actually don't like trading that much. The only reason I would even trade would be to complete the Pokédex, or get an egg move, hidden ability or nice Pokéball and then breed the Pokemon i would like myself. KB flawless legendaries are pretty much the only Pokemon I would enjoy to have that I did not get myself.
 
I don't think that baby Pokémon being pointless is an unpopular opinion since to be honest, they really are. 99.9% of them are just Dex filler, don't provide their evolutions with good, unique egg moves, and they make breeding a pain (baring catching them to get three free perfect IVs, which makes getting Azumarill that much easier). That last one especially so for Elekid, Magby, and Smoochum. Like Kurona said, level 30 is way too high.
Also, once again, Tyrogue is the only real exception since it connects the Hitmons together.
 
noobcubed said:
A Pokemon MMO/open-world RPG would suck.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree with this! Pokemon are not supposed to be a huge adventure that you will realistic never finish. I love the fact that you get to ''beat'' the game, and then have the option to continue into competitive play, shiny hunting, completing the pokedex, battle maison or even challenge run with self-imposed rules. The reason I love Pokemon is that it is so easy to pick up and just play.
 
Is not liking gen 1 really an unpopular opinion at this point e.e.

Anyways:
  • I really like gen 5 due to the roster which I believe is one of, if not, the very best gamefreak has produced.
  • I don't gush over hgss I mean they were pretty good games but not spectacular, in my opinion at least.
  • I actually like baby pokemon because they allow you to get their evolutions much earlier than you would if they didn't exist. At least for the ones that evolve by happiness.
  • I like zubat as a pokemon and never found it to be annoying since you can just run away from them although sometimes when they don't let you escape that's annoying.
  • Flygon is pretty stupid as are most pseudo legends, in game at least, because for a majority of the game you are stuck with their abysmal first stage.
  • Vannilluxe is one of my favorites.
  • I find tentacool to be a lot worse than zubat because they can be really high leveled, usually overleveling you right when you get surf, and therefore bypass your repels along with not letting you escape a ton.
 
Here's some more:
I don't really like the Latis. They were the first Pokémon I remember seeing and didn't like (which isn't that big a list). Their Megas are worse since you can't really tell them apart since they are both purple. I do like the Eon Flute, though.
Infernape is my favorite starter of all time (it's what I started with, even though I didn't get it until I was just a day younger than 16).
Added to my list of derpy Pokémon that I like and no one else does: I like Bidoof.
Other Pokémon I like and no one else does:
- Lickytung/Lickilicky (not kidding)
- Nosepass/Probopass.
I don't mind the smaller amount of Pokémon in Generation VI. Game Freak needed to slow down and they did.
I do think we needed two to three more new legendaries that aren't event exclusive. Three just seems low.
Ranger Helmut said:
  • Flygon is pretty stupid as are most pseudo legends, in game at least, because for a majority of the game you are stuck with their abysmal first stage.
Click to expand...
Flygon is not a pseudo-legendary Pokémon. While it meets the three stage evolutionary line requirement, it fails at the BST of 600 (Flygon's BST is 520).
Source: Bulbapedia
 
Vader_the_White said:
Here's some more:
I don't really like the Latis. They were the first Pokémon I remember seeing and didn't like (which isn't that big a list).
Infernape is my favorite starter of all time (it's what I started with, even though I didn't get it until I was just a day younger than 16).
Added to my list of derpy Pokémon that I like and no one else does: I like Bidoof.
Other Pokémon I like and no one else does:
- Lickytung/Lickilicky (not kidding)
- Nosepass/Probopass.
I don't mind the smaller amount of Pokémon in Generation VI. Game Freak needed to slow down and they did.
I do think we needed two to three more new legendaries that aren't event exclusive. Three just seems low.
Flygon is not a pseudo-legendary Pokémon. While it meets the three stage evolutionary line requirement, it fails at the BST of 600 (Flygon's BST is 520).
Source: Bulbapedia
Click to expand...
I was saying flygon and most of the pseudo legends not that flygon is one.
 
I dunno if this counts as unpopular but it definitely is an opinion. Here goes.

I dislike majority of Pokemon games. To be more specific, I detest pretty much every region bar Hoenn because they're too small and the ratio of towns to actual wilderness in the games is too big. I've always wanted a Pokemon game that's huge, but not an MMO/open-world RPG and that has many many lakes, rainforests, mountains, and all sorts of other places to discover for me to get lost in. Unova and Kalos had way too many big cities and took away that element of wilderness that I've always wanted, and playing through them got me bored quickly. If I wanted to see that many building (Lumiose & Castelia >.>) I would just go outside .-.

I also do not understand why Lucario has so many fan boys. Or Absol. I don't dislike them but they just seem like any other Pokemon to me (except Greninja cause he's the best!).

X and Y were terrible, and so was Team Flare.. I don't even know what their goal was...
 
I have never understood shiny hunting for the sake of shiny hunting. I mean... I can understand wanting one or two. Of the few that are good like Charizard, Greninja, Sableye, Rayquaza or whatever. But when it gets to the point that you're after a shiny that looks like literal shit such as Lanturn or Latios or Weavile or going after a Pokémon that barely looks different at all like Infernape or Gengar, I have to pose the question what the fuck are you doing? Is it just for the pride of saying "I got this Pokémon as a shiny"? Is it just to brag to your friends, is it for trade fodder, do you get some sense of achievement out of it? I would really love to know because while I understand getting some shinies that you think look cool, having shinies just for having shinies absolutely baffles me half the time.
 
Kurona said:
I have never understood shiny hunting for the sake of shiny hunting. I mean... I can understand wanting one or two. Of the few that are good like Charizard, Greninja, Sableye, Rayquaza or whatever. But when it gets to the point that you're after a shiny that looks like literal shit such as Lanturn or Latios or Weavile or going after a Pokémon that barely looks different at all like Infernape or Gengar, I have to pose the question what the fuck are you doing? Is it just for the pride of saying "I got this Pokémon as a shiny"? Is it just to brag to your friends, is it for trade fodder, do you get some sense of achievement out of it? I would really love to know because while I understand getting some shinies that you think look cool, having shinies just for having shinies absolutely baffles me half the time.
Click to expand...
Yep that's an unpopular opinion I can agree with it wholeheartedly, people just go crazy for shinning even tough their palette sucks just for the sake of sparkles... This was annoying as hell in DP era and still infuriates me to this day.
 
Kurona said:
I have never understood shiny hunting for the sake of shiny hunting. I mean... I can understand wanting one or two. Of the few that are good like Charizard, Greninja, Sableye, Rayquaza or whatever. But when it gets to the point that you're after a shiny that looks like literal shit such as Lanturn or Latios or Weavile or going after a Pokémon that barely looks different at all like Infernape or Gengar, I have to pose the question what the fuck are you doing? Is it just for the pride of saying "I got this Pokémon as a shiny"? Is it just to brag to your friends, is it for trade fodder, do you get some sense of achievement out of it? I would really love to know because while I understand getting some shinies that you think look cool, having shinies just for having shinies absolutely baffles me half the time.
Click to expand...
Yes, yes, just yes. Many of the people I know have whole shiny teams and I just look at them like they are crazy, though I have several they have given me, so I can't complain.
Also, at least Shiny Gengar was improved with Mega Evolution.
 
Xen said:
Edit: forgot one, I think I'm one of the few people who actually likes Jynx. She was pretty good in-game and competitively for quite some time, and contrary to popular belief, she IS NOT a racial stereotype, but is based off a Japanese mythical creature who's name I don't remember, but is supposed to be a snow demon in the form of a female that lives among snowy mountains in Japan.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, Jynx is closer to the yama-uba than to the yuki-onna (which inspired Froslass). I'm completely in agreement with pretty much everything in that post, by the way.

Let's see...

-The only thing that made HGSS memorable outside of contributions to the competitive scene was having your lead Pokemon walk behind you. That was probably my favorite game-specific feature in the series, and I really wish Game Freak brought it back in BW (I would absolutely love to run around everywhere with a Galvantula in tow), but those games didn't have much else going for them. They had most of the same problems as the original Gold and Silver, minus the infuriatingly barren movepools (which did at least offer a bit more of a challenge, in fairness), and while the Pokeathlon was a nice enough way to kill half an hour, it's not the kind of thing that keeps me coming back to play the game again.

-Keldeo, Lucario, Lopunny, and the entire Fennekin line all have horrendous designs and don't deserve even a tiny fraction of their popularity from an aesthetic standpoint. On the other hand, a lot of the most-hated designs from BW were good ideas that could have looked nice with relatively minor changes (especially Garbodor, the Vanillite line, and Druddigon).

-Adding fewer Pokemon than usual in XY was actually a pretty good idea. It's nice for things to slow down a bit, especially since we got all those Megas introduced as well. (Granted, there's still a bunch of things I want to see as Pokemon that aren't there yet, but that's still better than shoving so many mons at us that we end up forgetting half of them exist.)

-The large expanses of water in Hoenn weren't nearly as big a problem as people make them out to be. The only thing that made them kind of annoying is the lack of variety in Pokemon encountered - as cute as I find Tentacool, it does get a little obnoxious when you never see anything else barring Pelipper. If it wasn't for that, the long sea routes would be perfectly fine. Besides, the Surfing theme was lovely (but then, I can't think of a single RSE or ORAS track that wasn't good).

-In general, the only problem with Hoenn as a region is the awkward Pokemon selection - a couple of types were very underrepresented, and there was only one Bug-type (Heracross) that performed decently past the midgame, which is kind of annoying for me. The environments were all beautiful and more varied than those of any other region, which gave me the sense that Hoenn was much bigger than it actually was (a plus, since I like exploring in games) and also made it feel more real than the rest.

-The Platinum/HGSS Battle Frontier was kind of boring compared to Emerald's, honestly.

-Permanent weather was a net positive addition to the competitive scene, and made OU play a lot of fun once a select few broken threats were removed.
 
dwarfstar said:
-In general, the only problem with Hoenn as a region is the awkward Pokemon selection - a couple of types were very underrepresented, and there was only one Bug-type (Heracross) that performed decently past the midgame, which is kind of annoying for me. The environments were all beautiful and more varied than those of any other region, which gave me the sense that Hoenn was much bigger than it actually was (a plus, since I like exploring in games) and also made it feel more real than the rest.
Click to expand...
Bug-types are supposed to suck. Good ones were the exception, not the rule, until Gen V introduced ones that are clearly supposed to be usable to some degree (whether in competitive or the entire story, not just the beginning).
 
Unpopular opinion? Okay, I got one that has annoyed me for quite a while: All those who skipped Gen V because it still used sprites but got Gen VI because it moved the main series into 3D are, to use the least offensive word I can think of, stupid.

First off, for all those who used the excuse that they skipped Gen V because it looked like the same Pokemon game, XY IS TOO! It just got a coat of 3D paint! It didn't really do anything different then previous Pokemon game did in terms of core gameplay! Infact, if anything, them having to move the main series to 3D HURT more then it helped (in terms of the gameplay experience, financially it was sadly a necessary evil because people apparently need 3D keys jingled in front of them (hence Klefki) to consider something is worth buying).

I personally consider Gen V having the best story out of all the Pokemon games (not so much the sequels, they were okay but they were honestly the rival's story while the first gave a reason for the player to be as involved as they are), and I do believe it was because since they got so good with the sprite work and amount of 3D they used to include they were able to put focus and resources into the story. But since XY made the 3D jump, they had to spend so much time and resources into it that the story suffers for it and its noticeable. The main villains are barely in the story and if I was given a separate description for Team Flare and Lysandre I would have thought they were part of two separate teams. But NO, since Gen V still used filthy sprites it's not worth buying but since since Gen VI jingles 3D keys in front of your eyes you're hypnotized into buying it. Not to mention Team Plasma was a pretty interesting team, yeah they're just as ridiculous as other teams (well, except for Neo Team Flare who actually looked like a legitimate threat; one of the good things I can say about the sequel games) but their "initial" goals were different from other teams until ORAS Team Aqua and their leader order structure was more complicated (even though they never did anything with most of the Sages and Anthea & Concordia, but at least we got to battle the Shadow Triad). Also it was interesting to see how all the grunts seemed to actually have differing thoughts and opinions on their "initial" goal and weren't like most villain team's grunts who were all fanatics for their team.

And hey, did you like the 3D batting games (yes, Revolutions could have been better, but the 3D models were very nice) and the Pokemon Colosseum games? Well I hope you aren't expecting them to do those ever again! Since the main series games are 3D they really have no reason to do a console one since their main draw was to see Pokemon battling in 3D. At the same time you can also kiss professionally made Pokemon sprites goodbye, and to think they actually started animating Pokemon sprites (AND trainer sprites) so who knows where they could have gone.

Now don't get me wrong, I like Gen VI so far and I would be lying if I wasn't impressed by the 3D graphics (and being able to customize... which they didn't include in ORAS, though hopefully that was only for nostalgia sake). It's just that when I see someone say "I skipped Gen V because it looked liked the same game but got Gen VI because they moved to 3D" I facepalm, even more so if they say they felt XY was a bit lacking!

On a similar subject, I also hold the same opinion of those who say Pokemon is "the same game over and over again".

Just like how Mario is a platforming, Sonic is a runner, Call of Duty/Medal of Honor/etc. is a military shooter, and if you gave me any other series I could probably break them down into their core mechanic. Yes, the MAIN SERIES Pokemon games are a turned-based, monster battling game. It's about you, a new trainer, going out into their region to catch and train the Pokemon within it to become the best like no one ever was. That's the core concept, and if you can't see beyond that then why do you play sequels to any game? The thing about the Pokemon games is the things ADDITIONAL to the core concept. Each generation adds and changes mechanics to the battling, a major one being adding new Pokemon to use, as well as giving you different and unique locations, characters, and stories. The only reason why it seems like the same game over and over again is because we're up 6 generations and 25/24 main series games (however many of those are version pairs which I'll admit is BS EXCEPT for Gen V which actually did something with that idea (and I guess Gen III but Emerald combined both so sort of negates it)).

However, Pokemon has delved into other types of games with their SIDE GAMES. You can argue they maybe didn't do enough with certain concepts like the 3D, anime-like battling in the Pokemon Park games, but that's why they're side games; so they can experiment with the idea. However if they did ever do something to extrusive to the main series like switching to a 3D, anime-like battling you better believe there will be a lot of complaining since it'll probably stop feeling like Pokemon (unless they also keep the turn-based battling, but that's for another topic)

Hmm, maybe I'll look through the other comments another time, but for now that's all I have to say. Well, except for this:

Charizard is awesome and those who say otherwise are just jealous and angry they didn't pick/have Charizard as their first starter.

charizard_id_by_ask__charizard-d5dfyzl.jpg

... ACTUALLY that bring me to another unpopular opinion: I think Mega Charizard X is overrated and the superior Mega Charizard is Mega Charizard Y. It has an incredibly high Special Attack stat while MCX had to even its offensive stats out, has Drought meaning it not only has more powerful Fire-type attacks but also can use Solar Beam to cover most of its weaknesses, and finally just looks better compared to MCX which just looks like a Black Charizard with blue flames. Now MCX is still bad@$$ (it is still a Charizard afterall), its just personally I see MCY being the better one.
 
Pikachu315111 said:
Just like how Mario is a platforming, Sonic is a runner, Call of Duty/Medal of Honor/etc. is a military shooter, and if you gave me any other series I could probably break them down into their core mechanic. Yes, the MAIN SERIES Pokemon games are a turned-based, monster battling game. It's about you, a new trainer, going out into their region to catch and train the Pokemon within it to become the best like no one ever was. That's the core concept, and if you can't see beyond that then why do you play sequels to any game? The thing about the Pokemon games is the things ADDITIONAL to the core concept. Each generation adds and changes mechanics to the battling, a major one being adding new Pokemon to use, as well as giving you different and unique locations, characters, and stories. The only reason why it seems like the same game over and over again is because we're up 6 generations and 25/24 main series games (however many of those are version pairs which I'll admit is BS EXCEPT for Gen V which actually did something with that idea (and I guess Gen III but Emerald combined both so sort of negates it)).

However, Pokemon has delved into other types of games with their SIDE GAMES. You can argue they maybe didn't do enough with certain concepts like the 3D, anime-like battling in the Pokemon Park games, but that's why they're side games; so they can experiment with the idea. However if they did ever do something to extrusive to the main series like switching to a 3D, anime-like battling you better believe there will be a lot of complaining since it'll probably stop feeling like Pokemon (unless they also keep the turn-based battling, but that's for another topic)
Click to expand...
I think the main problem people have with this is that while changes are implemented, they're generally too little or are so hidden away it's invisible to the casual player.
To give an example of a game series which keeps the main concept but gives significant, easily-visible changes as it goes on, take Metal Gear Solid. It introduced Close Quarters Combat, a very significant part of the series from that point on in Snake Eater, enemy recruitment in Portable Ops, and Octocamo in Guns of the Patriots. These are all gameplay changes which do not alter the core aspect of the series - that being a game in which you sneak around avoiding enemy sight to infiltrate a base and tear it down from the inside out - but give a significant change which alters the gameplay to the extent you don't feel like you're just playing the first game again.
It's very difficult to say this for Pokémon. With the exception of Gen 2 which introduced Breeding, Day/Night, Special Split, two new typings, the aftergame etc., and Gen 6 which introduced us to Mega Evolution, it's difficult to pinpoint any particular change which is obvious and visible to the naked eye and casual player. The only possible thing you could point out is Abilities in Gen 3 but it's not particularly gamechanging to someone who just came from Gen 2. Gen 4 gave us the Physical/Special type split, which... you really can't see, and Gen 5... what did Gen 5 give us again? Give someone who has never played the series before Crystal to play and then also give them White 2. And then ask them to point out what significant changes there are aside from the obvious graphics upscale and increase in Pokémon species. I can guarantee you they'll get as far as maybe saying abilities before giving up and taking a much closer look at the game than they usually would.
 
Karxrida You at least had multiple Bug-type options that didn't completely drag their feet prior to RSE, though. Pinsir and Scyther both had good damage output and decent bulk by RGBY/GSC standards, and while their movepools weren't very good, that was true for a sizable majority of mons outside of Normal- and Water-types at the time. In addition, Venomoth wasn't that bad in first-gen, in my experience - good Speed, usable Special and a relatively early Psychic, and various different status options meant it could actually pull its weight despite the lack of halfway decent STABs. I haven't gotten around to using it in GSC yet, since Ariados is serving as the primary Bug-type in the Crystal Nuzlocke I'm currently running and swapping out one of the other team members would lose me some valuable coverage, so I can't really comment on its performance in second-gen at this point. (On a related note, Ariados actually picks up late-game compared to the early game, since it actually has pretty good damage output with Sludge Bomb - if its Speed was on par with Scyther's instead of base fucking 40, it'd be pretty solid.) In RSE, though, lacking halfway decent STAB options becomes more of a problem, which combines with the late availability to bring Pinsir down.
EDIT: I forgot Armaldo was a thing, so I guess that removes my objection to the lack of strong Bugs in RSE.

Pikachu315111 Nah, not a case of jealousy or anger at all. I've used all three Kanto starters and I loved Charizard as a kid, but its design doesn't hold up for me at all nowadays - the limbs are awkwardly proportioned compared to the torso, and that kinda kills what would otherwise be a nice enough design. Venusaur looks much more interesting to me (it's probably my favorite Poison-type outside of the Weedle and Venonat lines, actually), and it performed MUCH better on my team than Charizard did in most of the major battles. I do agree that Charizard Y looks better than X, though.
 
Last edited:
Oh uh since my last post was criticizing someone else rather than keeping in with the theme of the thread; suppose I'd best get on with that.
I never liked Typhlosion. Everywhere I go I hear about how it's awesome and cool and... I just don't get it. I can at least understand the reasons for fanboying over Charizard - I mean it's a fire-breathing dragon that you grow up with; just give it laser eyes and kids'll just die from joy - but... Typhlosion? Really? The bland, unimpressive lump of yellow and black with no defined shape? It sort of looks okay when spewing fire from it's back... then looks so depressing when it's on it's own. Quilava looked like a definite improvement over Cyndaquil; giving hope for some really awesome, four-legged fire-spewing beast, but... then you get Typhlosion. And it's so disappointing and boring and... it just has nothing, basically. Even battle wise the only interesting thing about it is Eruption. I'll pass; Based Gator for me any day.
 
Pikachu315111 said:
Wall of Text with a Charizard rant at the end.
Click to expand...
The Megas aren't really comparable from a competitive perspective. Their viability is dependent on the format you're playing and they have completely different roles; one is a dangerous sweeper (Singles and maybe Doubles?) while the other is a powerful Wallbreaker (Singles) or Spread attacker (Doubles). Because of this the general opinion of which one is the "better" one is based on the format. Not dissing your opinion or anything, just thought that needed to be said.

Kurona said:
I think the main problem people have with this is that while changes are implemented, they're generally too little or are so hidden away it's invisible to the casual player.
To give an example of a game series which keeps the main concept but gives significant, easily-visible changes as it goes on, take Metal Gear Solid. It introduced Close Quarters Combat, a very significant part of the series from that point on in Snake Eater, enemy recruitment in Portable Ops, and Octocamo in Guns of the Patriots. These are all gameplay changes which do not alter the core aspect of the series - that being a game in which you sneak around avoiding enemy sight to infiltrate a base and tear it down from the inside out - but give a significant change which alters the gameplay to the extent you don't feel like you're just playing the first game again.
It's very difficult to say this for Pokémon. With the exception of Gen 2 which introduced Breeding, Day/Night, Special Split, two new typings, the aftergame etc., and Gen 6 which introduced us to Mega Evolution, it's difficult to pinpoint any particular change which is obvious and visible to the naked eye and casual player. The only possible thing you could point out is Abilities in Gen 3 but it's not particularly gamechanging to someone who just came from Gen 2. Gen 4 gave us the Physical/Special type split, which... you really can't see, and Gen 5... what did Gen 5 give us again? Give someone who has never played the series before Crystal to play and then also give them White 2. And then ask them to point out what significant changes there are aside from the obvious graphics upscale and increase in Pokémon species. I can guarantee you they'll get as far as maybe saying abilities before giving up and taking a much closer look at the game than they usually would.
Click to expand...
Gen 3 also introduced Double battles, which weren't really explored much in-game but are totally different from Singles and are the basis of the official real-life tournaments. Abilities also change the way Pokemon interact while the Physical/Special split is really important from a competitive perspective as it made or broke a lot of Pokemon's viability.

Also nice double post nerd. :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top