Decline in the Pokemon design?

Has anyone else noticed how desperate the designs for Pokemon look?

For example, Purugly and Lickylicky. Not exactly their best ideas.

Discuss here how the design of the Pokemon seems to be decreasing/increasing/staying the same.

=P I had to post this after reading that.

This post has been edited by Pomerania on Aug 4 2007, 03:53 AM

*coughtl;drcough*

Yes, I totally agree with that. My biggest pet peeves are the evolutions that branch off older generation Pokemon (like Magnezone and Dusknoir). It would have been good if they followed the original design, but no, they COMPLETELY changed the whole thing -- colors, accessories, etc.

Take Rhyperior for example. Rhyhorn and Rhydon had a nice gray color scheme as well as the perfect "stone dinosaur" design. But then, Rhyperior just skips in and introduces this red and dark brown color scheme as well as these weird elbow cannons and red protection pad things. And to make things worse, they get rid of the dinosaur-ish features of Rhyhorn/don (those awesome looking bumps sticking out of their heads) and make him look like a mutated bear, or something. Just great. An awesome Pokemon (Rhydon), ruined.

Magmar suddenly gets fat when he evolves, and gets arm cannons that have absolutely NOTHING to do with his design. Yanmega looks like some robot. Dusknoir, ugh. Just no. Magnezone (Dusknoir being a good runner-up) is probably the worst out of them all.

I think the only exceptions are Roserade and Mismagius.

I dread seeing some Farfetch'd, Seviper, or Zangoose evolution (or any other single Pokemon without any family for that matter, because they're the ones who are in the worst danger) if there's ever a fifth generation.

You can find plenty of rants on my site. =]

Yeah, I know. O__O;

Magnezone looks like something Team Rocket could have invented! Just strap an "R" onto it and... Yeah... It doesn't look like a living thing.

God, I'd hate it if they mauled Seviper or Zangoose.

And a comic that has to do with this topic:
http://cubetoons.com/index.php?option=com_...id=157&Itemid=1
(Sorry if linking to that isn't allowed. It doesn't directly link to the image though, so it should be fine.)

Look at the first panel.

xD Lol, yeah, it seems like Game Freak is just churning out new Pokemon just to make more money (in which they succeeded).

That's what I don't like about big franchises -- they get fat and they start not caring about the thing in general (well, probably that's too harsh of a word, but just aren't as careful and don't put as much effort) and just focus on the money, since they know that no matter how horrible they make it (in this case, it's the new Pokemon), it'll still be a best seller.

If these were the original 150 Pokemon, I would have never, ever been drawn into it.

Yeah, I know, I'm such a pessimist. ];

Hm... I don't think all of the designs are terrible. Admittedly I don't like the way most of the evolutions turned out, but then I didn't like half of what they evolved from in the first place. (Nosepass... UGH) And someone else on another forum made a comment that I totally agree with: WAAAAAAY too much blue and black in the color schemes of the newest generations. GF definitely has a new blue/black fetish. And a few of them are unoriginal... but I don't dislike them. Perhaps I'm just tolerant, but eh. For example, I really happen to like Infernape's design; it's an excellent throwback to the myths that it's based on, and a far cry flashier and more unique-looking than Charizard. (I like Charizard, too, of course; nothing wrong with simplicity.)

...Electivire's face makes small children, grown men and me cry tears of deepest fear and sorrow, on the other hand. It looks like Electabuzz stuck its head in a blender. Froslass is a creative idea, but the fairies are identical and that irritates me. (I don't hate them, either... lol, I've read your rant on them Silverwing, and I have to say I disagree with a lot of it, but that has still got to be as bland as it gets.)

Overall, I like about as many of them as I dislike. The thing is, that's exactly how I feel about each and every generation. Hitmonchan>Omanyte. Slowking>Wobbuffet. Blaziken>Illumise. I have my own little opinions like that for every gen.

Nooo not the snake pokemon. I will personally asassinate them if they butcher any of my snakes!!!

I hate most of the evolutions of old Pokemon. I like Froslass though.

I hope Nintendo wont evolve Absol, Seviper, Mightyena, Houndoom and/or Zangoose.

This post has been edited by Wolf Shadow on Aug 4 2007, 11:25 AM

When I first saw their designs, I was like "Ugh, what were they thinking? Those things are ugly!" But now, I don't care as much. Yeah, stuff like Purugly and Probopass are still ugly in my eyes, but I don't really care about their design as much.

For some reason, I like Porygon-Z's design.

Yeah, there's some serious problems with the fourth generation. Magnezone and Probopass just scare me. If I was a few years younger, they'd probably give me nightmares.

I agree. They'd be most likely to evolve Absol and Zangoose, I think- not much you can do with the others. But even with Absol and Zangoose, the evolutions would wind up mutilated and creepy-looking.

Sure, there are some good evolutions. Roserade and Mismagius look great. Froslass is cool, too, though I don't see how a Snorunt could've evolved into it.

Another random complaint- the main trio in the fourth gen. Uxie, Azelf, and Mesprit pretyt much look the same. And they look like wierd Mew/Jirachi fusions, with a few slight variations.

Also, there's WAY too many legendaries in the fourth generation. Honestly-where did they all come from? On the other generations, there was a limit of five or six legendaries. In the fourth gen, there's 13, plus a fake legendary that you can get from breeding. Just the main trio (three bird, three dogs, three regi's, etc), the main duo (Groudon and Kyogre, Ho-oh and Lugia, etc), and one or two others is fine. But thirteen is ridiculous.

Pokémon designers must be really desperate to make monsters like Spiritomb. I mean, I've seen some great fakes for example in the Pokémon Treasures RPG that would serve an official PokéDex much better than those unimaginative pokémon. Oh and Darkrai looks more like a digimon than a pokémon to me...

But not all of them are bad, I can remember from the top of my head pokémon like Mismagius, Diaruga, Lumineon, Floatzel, Gabite, Drapion or Lucario that look like good designed creatures. And the only evolution I like, not counting with Mismagius is probably Gliscor. Looks cool, although too similar to Gligar.

This post has been edited by Squall on Aug 4 2007, 06:30 PM

Yes, I hate how Nintendo unglorifies legends like this. >_> Heatran, Giratina, and Cresselia should be cut, or just be called very powerful one-offs. Like I said in my DP review, there shouldn't be legendaries if they resemble no importance to the storyline (sticking some little boy getting sick at the last minute doesn't count). The other games, mostly RBY and GSC and to an extent RSE, all the legendaries are of some importance and mentioned as you play the game.

Scratch off Floatzel and Lucario (cool-looking, but it's more the Digimon-ish Blaziken type than Pokemon) from that list. Some new designs that I do like are: Lumineon, Gastradon, Luxray, Skuntank, Staraptor, Mismagius, Hippowdon, Bibarel (doofy and retarded looking, but that's not what counts), and Garchomp. Mostly just a list of good designed Pokemon rather than personal favorites.

WARNING: Okay, I am about to ramble and ramble until your eyes bleed, but I have to say it anyway. I must defend my darling legends!

Hm... now, now, Silverwing, I'm not sure Giratina deserves to be cut. And it's not just the fact that I love it speaking here. Think about it: Giratina is part of a trio with Dialga and Palkia. Dialga and Palkia each have their own version. If Nintendo does a third version, then, chances are it will feature Giratina and Giratina will become important to the story. If I recall correctly, Rayquaza had no relevance in Ruby/Sapphire, and yet it's central (well, not really but it's important) to Emerald. Who's to say that Giratina doesn't have such a story of its own? Perhaps it's just yet to be told. They do create Pokémon with future plans in mind, after all.

In truth, the same can be said about any of the other legendaries. Explain to me the storyline significance of the following Pokémon in their respective mainstream games, keeping in mind your comments about mention during the story: Articuno, Zapdos, Moltres, Mewtwo, Mew, Raikou, Entei, Lugia, Ho-Oh, Celebi, Regirock, Regice, Registeel, Latias, Latios, Jirachi, Deoxys, Regigigas, Phione, Manaphy, Darkrai, Shaymin and Arceus. (And Heatran, Cresselia and Giratina, of course, but since you mentioned those and not the rest of the 4th-gen legendaries I figured these are the ones I'd call out.) Based on the basic facts we get from the games alone, absolutely none. Where in FireRed do you HAVE to go and catch Zapdos or else the world will explode? Or does some random person just mentioning "Oh, by the way, there are supposedly these three powerful bird Pokémon" make them hugely important to the defeat of Team Rocket or whatever? In fact, this just goes to prove that EVERY legendary other than Suicune (eh, kinda), Kyogre, Groudon, Rayquaza, the fairies, Dialga and Palkia is nothing more than Pokédex filler and sidequest fodder. And yet you don't seem to find many of those pointless because other games and other things have given them significance. How do you know that some interesting stories or legends about these others won't be added during the events or other things?

The storyline of the game is also only one factor. Sinnoh is not just the story of a little boy/girl taking a couple of months to earn some badges and defeat Evil Team Generic. Sinnoh is an entire world, a world with its own history and mythology; the game itself is this world, and the storyline is but one small aspect of it that you get to experience. Darkrai and Cresselia have nothing to do with defeating Cyrus, yes, that's true. But the people of Sinnoh believe that Darkrai causes horrible, unending, nightmare-filled sleep, and they all fear it; as such, they turn to the "blessings" of Cresselia to protect them from it. Darkrai and Cresselia are bupkus to Cyrus, but they mean so much to Sinnoh as a whole.

Furthermore, things like the movies and the anime add mystique to legendaries where the game does not. Given your example, Darkrai is not important to the story. Yet the upcoming movie gives some backstory on it and gives it something of a purpose. As much as I personally despise the anime and the majority of the movies, you can't deny that they're just as much a part of the fourth gen as the games are, and so any kind of history or importance they can impart to the legendaries is equally valid.

Okay, okay, I'm almost done. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that you can't just look at the barebones, pre-Elite Four storyline of the first two games in a long succession still to come and decide that a legendary is worthless. You have to take everything about the generation as a whole into consideration as well, including sources that are not the game and things that are yet to come. Of course, you're still entitled to your opinion and your tastes and everything, but consider giving the fourth gen a bit of a wider look before you pass judgment.

...Besides, I'm a fantasy/mythology freak. Tell me: if I'm in the mood to pen a story about the myths/deities/whatever of Pokémon, what exactly am I supposed to write about without 30+ different and wonderful bases to build off of? In any pantheistic religion the practicers believe in TONS of gods/goddesses to explain every facet of existence that they can't comprehend or control; with more than one legendary, Pokémon obviously has a pantheistic religion, so why should it be any different? Certainly you would agree that real-world myths such as those of the Greeks or Egyptians would be far less interesting if they'd only had 5 gods to tell stories about instead of from the dozens to the thousands (be grateful that Pokémon isn't like ancient Egypt, children!)

...Oh, and I just happen to love them all, too. So there! XP

(Okay, okay, one last thing and then hopefully I'll stop editing this and shut up. But you made a comment about Magmortar's cannons having nothing to do with Magmar's design, I believe. Explain Wartortle and Blastoise, please. And Squall, you said that Spiritomb looks like a desperate attempt... it's not as flashy as some other Pokémon, no, but don't forget that the design of a Pokémon extends far beyond its physical appearance. True, that may be what much of this thread is about, but Spiritomb has a little story about it that is apparently based on a real myth [something about 108 spirits; this is also why 'Tomb is #108 in the Sinnoh Dex] that I've been meaning to look up and that sounds fairly interesting. Growlithe and Arcanine just look like glorified barking tigers, right? And yet they are based on the dog-like or lion-like statues that are believed to be protective spirits in Chinese and Japanese culture [Growlithe's Japanese name comes from this influence]. The first gen, therefore, has some of the same "anomalies" as the fourth. While you can disagree with those if you like, it's just not fair if you don't disagree with the same issues in earlier gens as they DID in fact exist there as well. This really isn't anything new.)

(And Yanmega looks more like a real dragonfly, or a real specimen of the ancient, six-foot-wingspan or whatever dragonflies to be exact. Dragonflies don't have eyes and pretty rounded segments like Yanma; they're closer to Yanmega's. Admittedly, making a Pokémon look "real" doesn't appeal to some people, but that's all they did.)

This post has been edited by Kratos on Aug 5 2007, 07:25 AM

I'm pissed off that they ruined the Chansey line with "Happini"

yea, Happiny is really dumb! And I don't like the river pokemon. They looked like messed-up mews! And what's with Stunky and Skuntank? They're just oddly drawn SKUNKS! Honestly, if the pokemon company can't think of any good new pokemon, they should stop making new types. Some of the fourth generation are okay like Dialga and Infernape, but honestly: LICKILIKITY!?!?! It's pointless!

"Good" is entirely a matter of opinion. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean no one else does... that can't be used as grounds for the argument "they need to stop making bad Pokémon".

...I think everyone's personal opinion, however, is the same as yours: Lickilicky sucks. And baby Pokémon are pointless except for a few extra egg move options, half of which the lines really could have done without in the first place. So yeah.

I have not played the game or spent any time inverstigating on the genesis and mystical history of Spiritomb. I was making a pretty superficial comment on its appearance, since this is the thread to do so. And pokémon like Growlithe and Arcanine have awesome designs (not saying that by personal opinion).

This post has been edited by Squall on Aug 5 2007, 05:02 PM

@Kratos (not going to quote the post because that'll be a hassle): Okay, so maybe I should reword my that sentence: Nintendo shouldn't make legends out of nowhere.

In the older generations, legends followed a formula: a trio, an event Pokemon, box art Pokemon, etc. Sure, that formula has become distorted over time, but it still stays the same. However, DP completely breaks it by introducing Cresselia, Heatran, and Giratina.

They serve no real purpose in the games (sure it's nice to have them there, but them being legendaries is just.... awkward), they were pulled from the dirt with no storyline to back up their importance. And when you catch them, it's like "Um... okay, I caught it. So now what?" All they do is (as I always say) *unglorify* legendaries; catching them doesn't have the same sort of satisfaction it once did. Heck, I even forgot that I had to catch Regigigas, because I lost track of all the post-National dex legendaries there was to catch. All personal memory problems and what-not aside, that just proves how abundant these random legendaries are and just how... optional it is to catch them. Nothing special happens before you catch them and after you catch them.

Basically one word sums them up: pointless.

But yes, you do have a point with the movies and anime -- they can very easily spice up the storyline there. That's probably the only reason why they exist.

As for the Magmortar thing, with Blastoise, the cannons were an add-on; the rest of his body flowed with his pre-evolutions. With Magmortar, they completely replaced his hands, in the process getting rid of those awesome spikey layers on his arms that had a lot of potential to turn into something more awesome if he had a different evolution. Not to mention they randomly added some ugly pink into his color scheme and deleted his tail.

So they're formulaic. What do the trios or box art have to do with the story? What good is a formula if it doesn't benefit the story in some way? Articuno, Zapdos and Moltres have no more point than Regigigas; they just fit into a nice little box as opposed to being unique and different. That would irritate me more than satisfy me, really. If your argument is that a legendary must contribute to the story to have any sort of "glory" other than that used for marketing purposes, then, again, no legendaries other than Suicune, Kyogre, Groudon, Rayquaza, the fairies, Dialga and Palkia have any point at all. Tradition =/= purpose.

...Then again, considering that I haven't played Pokemon for its storyline since RBY (they're all exactly the same with different names!), a legendary's relevance to the same-ol-same-ol storyline means nothing to me. Perhaps I just appreciate being able to fill in the blanks myself since I'm tired of 8 badges and Evil Team Generic, really. They serve a purpose to the world as a whole, and that's of far greater interest to me.

Have you wondered why Zangoose, Seviper, Spiritomb, Pachirisu and those with no pre-evos or evos didn't get one (an evo)?

Maybe because Nintendo will make a fifth generation!!

Also, any Pokemon stronger than Raichu shouldn't have an evo. Electabuzz and Magmar and Rhydon are already strong Pokemon! They can go without evos!

However, I like the other Pokemon.

Yeah I see your point. I have been thinking about this for the past couple of months but with Giratina. How are they going to make this game. Make you get the National Dex before you beat the game and then be able to capture Dialga and Palkia after you beat it. It doesn't make any sense to me.

Here's mah opinion...
I agree with the "They abused the legendaries" By making so many. And they also abused US by making 3 of them you have to be near new york or something in order to obtain one. Though that isn't much different from the past games.
As for The other Pokemon, The Evos and stuff don't look too bad, but they don't look...simple enough?
Here I'll show you what i mean.
link1
link2
link3
Can you see the odd one out? Typhlyosion and it's evolutions are relatedly simple, under belly, back, arms and legs, head, flame. Easy enough to draw and such.
Now look at gliscor...
Now i feel dizzy. Who the heck designed that thing? The 4th gen Pokemon are WAY over detailed. I dare somebody to try remembering that whole thing and trying to draw it. You would probably fail epically.
Why did i include Pikachu? To waste your life mortals. But it is also another good example of a pretty simplistic design.
And...I agree with the "Don't evolve very strong Pokemon."
Ash ketchum agrees! Don't evolve already strong Pokemon, cuz then Somebody will die very painfully.You might be next.

...You people have no imaginations. That's why you don't like legendaries

...Nah. Anyway, yes, there are too many, but as DP is still new I still think it's only fair to give Nintendo a chance to explain things before you jump to conclusions about how useless or underappreciated or whatever they are.

Too many simplistic Pokémon would be boring in my opinion. Gliscor is weird-looking, admittedly, but it's not "impossible to draw" or anything. Detail just means it takes time, not that it's "hard". Richly-detailed Pokémon are more unique than "blah, boring red unoriginal dragon with *gasp* a FLAMING TAIL! That's so UNIQUE!" The trick, of course, is to add details in such a way that they don't look awkward. They didn't quite succeed with Gliscor, no. (It's anorexic, too... o.O)

How dare you diss a 1st generation Pokemon!!!*Shot*
Now then, I don't really care that much for originality, as long as they don't reuse the same idea that they already used *Like making another Pikachu with a different appearance, but it's still an electric mouse Pokemon blah blah. If that ever happens, nobody would hold it against you to snipe the nintendo president.
And the excess details make it look...like a different style then the rest of the Pokemon. Like Anime style and Looney tunes style, except maybe not as drastic. It just doesn't look like a Pokemon to me.
Now, I need to go get a bandage for my leg, and some tweezer to get the bullet out.

This is coming from a girl who's been wanting to get D/P for weeks/months.

Uxie, Mesprit and Azelf are just fine as legends. Legendaries don't have to look like muscular Pokemon just because they're legendaries, nor because legendaries are usually big If you ask me, the current legendary trio is fine. They weren't made with exaggeration, if not made with ideas for them in mind. Also, I just read your Legendaries reviews for D/P, and you kinda missed something about Uxie, Misprit and Azelf. Those gems on their foreheads actually meant something. The gems were used to make the red chain, according to Galactic people. They are the guardians that prevent Palkia/Dialga from being released, and so, the red chain's particles were divided and stored into each ones forehead, making those red gems something worth having, in my opinion. Uxie's big head is his brain, by the way. Mesprit's worms are also part of his different emotions, and Azelf's two airplane wings are meant to be his supposed willpower.

But Nosepass' evolution looks like Michael Jackson's hair, srsly.

This post has been edited by Faltzer on Aug 8 2007, 11:45 PM

I wish people would stop jumping up and calling all the fourth-generation Pokémon they don't like "unoriginal" or "desperate" or "they're running out of ideas".

Fact: the fourth-generation Pokémon, on the whole, are at least ten times more creative than an average Kanto Pokémon.

Look at Growlithe. It's a freaking DOG WITH STRIPES. Seel is a white seal sticking its tongue out. Caterpie, Metapod and Butterfree are a caterpillar, a cocoon and a butterfly. Any five-year-old could think of those. Now take Spiritomb, which you're whining about. There is no way in hell you would have thought of something like that, ever. Period. It is not "uncreative" or "desperate". It's the very epitome of originality, but as it happens you don't like it.

And that is the problem. The fourth-generation Pokémon, exactly because their designs are so very creative, look a lot more alien than the friendly old animal-ripoff Kanto Pokémon, and are more difficult to like for the average person.

So please accept it for what it is. You don't like the designs of the fourth-generation Pokémon. This is not because they're "uncreative" or because "Game Freak are running out of ideas". It's because you like animal-ripoffs more than you like truly imaginatively designed creatures.

There is nothing wrong with this. I like animal-ripoffs more, too. But when people keep calling the fourth-generation Pokémon uncreative when they are blatantly not, it just pisses me off.