I'm definitely with you on this one. When I played Silver, I picked Chikorita as my starter and it has not really disappointed me. It even helped me to clutch a win against Morty's Gengar. This is also what it did in my Heart Gold game when I used it again.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
Chikorita doesn't do that poorly in Johto's Gyms - while some of them can SE Chikorita, most of those moves are really bad. Pryce, for instance, only has Icy Wind (weak) and Blizzard (inaccurate, low PP). Furthermore, Scyther mostly uses Quick Attack and often breaks a Fury Cutter combo this way, meaning that Chikorita/Bayleef is likely to get status on it. It's also great vs. Clair due to tanking Kingdra's moves well and being able to hit it with good STAB. Also fine in HG/SS against Gyarados.
I only dislike Treecko's bad stat distribution, below-average typing and terrible level-up movepool. It's harsh in RSE and still bad in ORAS.
I only dislike Treecko's bad stat distribution, below-average typing and terrible level-up movepool. It's harsh in RSE and still bad in ORAS.
Treecko is far from bad. In RSE it does fine by defeating Gym 1, not doing badly against Gym 2 and 3 then when it gets Leaf Blade as a Grovyle that's all it really needs - especially when the last half of the game is almost entirely water and it has a type advantage against both teams.
In ORAS the special split starts to hurt it but the mega stone brings it up to speed.
That's what I meant.
I'm honestly of the opinion that Serperior DOESN'T suck. Sure, Snivy and Servine are a bit rough(read: really) but as a Serperior it pulls its weight decently well. Its main problem is having a poor gym performance. Against most other things, I've found it doing pretty well. I remember a White Nuzlocke that I did where my Serperior was definitely carrying the team. The thing is, if it gets the chance to boost via Coil, it can easily sweep teams. I believe my set for Serp was Coil, Leaf Blade, Return, and Dragon Tail, and it did pretty darn well. It even solo'd the final Rival battle and two elite four members. It's definitely not as bad as some people say. Not the best, but not the worst either.
In ORAS, Treecko learns Giga Drain by Lv 21 and Grovyle's Leaf Blade is at 23. Mega Sceptile's base 110 attack Dual Chop is pretty great too. The bad rap it got from RSE is largely patched up in ORAS.
The Gen 5 starters are just kind of outclassed by pokemon of their own type you get almost immediately (Lilligant, Darmanitan, and Simipour or Seismitoad). Samurott gets a pass since they're really aren't that many water types in-game for Black and White . They aren't bad necessarily, but if you compare them to the Gen 4 and Gen 6 trio's in-game performance they seem worse then they are.
I like Chikorita a lot, but gamefreak could really give it some more love. It really doesn't have anything unique to it anymore, and it is a bit of a liability in it's home-region of Johto.
Never understood Treecko being a "bad" starter though, but my Gen 3 game was Emerald where the entire last third was water-types, so having a grass-type went farther.
I like Chikorita a lot, but gamefreak could really give it some more love. It really doesn't have anything unique to it anymore, and it is a bit of a liability in it's home-region of Johto.
Never understood Treecko being a "bad" starter though, but my Gen 3 game was Emerald where the entire last third was water-types, so having a grass-type went farther.
I'm not really sure if this goes under "Unpopular Opinions" but it's worth a shot. I really don't understand why Gen 5 gets so much hate for it's Pokemon designs. There have been several Pokemon designs that been outright disgusting and bland, such as Muk and Voltorb respectively. Despite all of this Gen 5 seems to be on receiving end of all the hate despite having several Pokemon with good designs.
For me, it's got something to do with variety and diversity, and something to do with execution of concepts.
To begin with the latter, Garbodor and the Vanillite line are the most commonly critiqued Pokémon of Gen V. As you say, their concepts aren't too far removed from what has been pulled off successfully earlier, but I think the execution is flawed somewhat. Garbodor got unlucky with its face and its pose. It looked plain stupid, and that randomly waving arm in the concept art and ingame sprites really hurt its image. It ended up much more dumb-looking than it needed to, leading to many people criticizing its design. I was among them for a long time, but I've later come to realize that it's its looks I can't stand. With only a few minor tweaks to its appearance - its goofy face and its twitchy pose, mostly - Garbodor can look surprisingly good.
Vanillite's line is a little flawed in another direction: They look too much like ice cream with faces and too little like anything else. Other Pokémon get this sort of complaints too. Sunflora is an early example, Glalie got some flak too. The "object with a face" look can work fine if the design doesn't resemble a specific object too much, but if it does it goes straight into the uncanny valley. Same goes for some of the lazier animal-based designs. You never saw many fans of Goldeen and Stantler around, and Ducklett was ridiculed for the same reasons.
As for the "variety and diversity" bit, that's my biggest gripe with Gen Vs designs. Many of them felt like complete rehashes of older Pokémon designs, only for the sake of creating more new content. To take one example: for all intents and purposes, Tympole traces Poliwag's concept. Pure Water type blue tadpole that evolves twice, the first time at level 25, found in shallow ponds. That sort of specific properties works fine once, but don't try to sell it to me twice and pretend it's something new. I'm fine with some concepts being rehashed over and over again throughout the generations (the early birds, bugs and rodents), but when so many of the new Pokémon completely emulate old ones, I'm less impressed. Roggenrola and Geodude. Timburr and Machop. Drilbur and Sandshrew. Dwebble and Paras. Throh&Sawk and the Hitmons. Audino and Chansey. Munna and Drowzee. Practically half of the Unova Pokédex emulates concepts we've seen earlier, often combining the same design basis with the same type (Normal type nurse, Psychic tapir, Fighting strongman, etc). These are interesting concepts when used once, but not twice. With the exclusion of Gen I-IV Pokémon from BW, it felt like Game Freak didn't even want to acknowledge the older Pokémon, instead filling the exact same roles with new designs that so blatantly resembled the old ones. And then they pushed it as something new and refreshing we hadn't seen before. No wonder players were upset.
There's also the small case of pushing the same design too many times. Elemental monkeys. Do I need to say any more? Great and original concept, but making three sets of functionally identical Pokémon got old quite fast. Especially since they insisted on always, without exception, bringing up the entire trio every time. The legendary genies were criticized for the same thing, they were for practical purposes the same design used thrice.
It has to be acknowledged, though, that Gen V does have a great deal of cool, new and original designs. The latter half of the Unova Pokédex is brim-filled with stuff we clearly never saw before, Pokémon based on new and interesting concepts, most of them really well executed. It's as if Game Freak felt obliged to find replacements for a lot of older Pokémon when designing Gen V, and when they were done they were free to let the creative juices flow. It's too bad that the copy-and-paste-job of the first half of the 'dex overshadowed the top-notch creativity displayed in the latter. Normally, the practise of design reuse is limited enough that you can see past it (you put the early bugs and rodents behind you quickly enough), but in Unova it was too extensive in-your-face.
Last edited:
I think that a lot of the reasoning behind having so many pokemon in gv trace concepts from g1 was that it was sort of a throwback moment where they had around 150 mons and a lot of lines that made one reminisce about gen 1 lines. Does that make sense? It seems way too obvious to have been a design blunder, rather something that was intended to gain good PR but flopped instead? By having a lot of GV mons fill the archetypes/roles filled by traditional GI mons I think they wanted a sort of back-to-their-roots style thing going on (perhaps to appease genwunners, idk). Personally I think that aspect of it worked, although as codraroll said the designs themselves are lacking in some areas. The general design framework, however, seems pretty good to me.
e.g.
they have their two-stage normal (common across all gens but still)
but also two-stage poison muk-trubbish
three-stage steel klink-magnemite
three-stage fighting with trade evo- machop-
as cod said three-stage water frogs
three-stage ghosts
etc
e.g.
they have their two-stage normal (common across all gens but still)
but also two-stage poison muk-trubbish
three-stage steel klink-magnemite
three-stage fighting with trade evo- machop-
as cod said three-stage water frogs
three-stage ghosts
etc
I think the reasoning behind it is more due to the theme of Unova: differences / contrast
Unova was the first region that was based on another country than Japan. It makes sense, from a biological perspective, that the Unova Pokemon fulfil similar roles as their previous Generation counterparts. They perform the same function in the ecosystem, perhaps they even had a common early ancestor, but because of the physical distance between the regions they have evolved into different species. Everything about Unova needed to express that it was a 'new' and 'foreign' region (Pokemon included), because that's exactly what it was.
Perhaps the infinite amount of for example Zubat and Geodude in caves up until then was also regarded a bit too much if repeated for the fifth time. So they chose to vary upon that by introducing the Woobat and the Roggenrola.
I personally like some of the Pokemon that the 5th Generation introduced a lot, but I also mostly agree with the ones that the 'hate'-crowd seemed to focus their anger on back then, for reasons that have already been detailed by Codraroll. Also noteworthy is Heatmor. We haven't had an anteater before, but Heatmor is incredibly ugly and I dislike its design. I appreciate the guts it must have taken to fuse an anteater with a motor of some sort, but ... The exhaust pipe? The weird arms? The things at its crotch and on its back? I don't like it. It's shapelessness doesn't help its case either. But then there are also very nice designs like Servine, Whimsicott, Escavalier, Eelektross, Mandibuzz, ... Chandelure even makes the 'item into Pokemon' concept work very nicely as well!
Unova was the first region that was based on another country than Japan. It makes sense, from a biological perspective, that the Unova Pokemon fulfil similar roles as their previous Generation counterparts. They perform the same function in the ecosystem, perhaps they even had a common early ancestor, but because of the physical distance between the regions they have evolved into different species. Everything about Unova needed to express that it was a 'new' and 'foreign' region (Pokemon included), because that's exactly what it was.
Perhaps the infinite amount of for example Zubat and Geodude in caves up until then was also regarded a bit too much if repeated for the fifth time. So they chose to vary upon that by introducing the Woobat and the Roggenrola.
I personally like some of the Pokemon that the 5th Generation introduced a lot, but I also mostly agree with the ones that the 'hate'-crowd seemed to focus their anger on back then, for reasons that have already been detailed by Codraroll. Also noteworthy is Heatmor. We haven't had an anteater before, but Heatmor is incredibly ugly and I dislike its design. I appreciate the guts it must have taken to fuse an anteater with a motor of some sort, but ... The exhaust pipe? The weird arms? The things at its crotch and on its back? I don't like it. It's shapelessness doesn't help its case either. But then there are also very nice designs like Servine, Whimsicott, Escavalier, Eelektross, Mandibuzz, ... Chandelure even makes the 'item into Pokemon' concept work very nicely as well!
If that was the case, they missed the point completely. People weren't necessarily tired of seeing Geodude and Zubat in caves over and over again. They were tired of, in every game with a cave, in every cave in the game, meeting the same 1-3 Pokémon over and over and over and over and over again. Enter Boldore...
They didn't fix any mistakes. They made the exact same mistake over again, with a different Pokémon.
And that's another of my gripes with BW. There is great variety of what Pokémon you meet between various area, one route will usually have remarkably different Pokémon from the next, but within the routes there is little to no variation. You meet the same 4-5 wild Pokémon over and over, and the trainers happen to have those exact same Pokémon too. Plus the mandatory Pansage/Pansear/Panpour or Simisage/Simisear/Simipour. Always all three. You see one, the two others WILL follow.
Good thing XY seem to have introduced a new philosophy, with actually increasing the variety of Pokémon available in the various locations. Let's hope they'll stick to that.
You're right, but Rome wasn't built in one day either. I personally regard it as a step towards improvement. At least a cave with Woobat and Roggenrola felt better to me than those caves in Sinnoh that had nothing to set them apart. I mean, Kanto was the first region, so for that one it's naturally okay. Then there's Johto, which is Kanto's neighbour and functioned almost like an extension, it was fine. Hoenn is good too, there's Whismur Tunnel with its own story, Shoal Cave has Ice-type Pokemon, Pt. Pyre is actually a graveyard, so the use of Zubat and Geodude was just in the background, and did not overwhelm. But I cannot recall a single cave in Sinnoh that didn't feel like chore to explore. In Unova, I soon got tired of the Roggenrola and Woobat, but at least I found them sort of refreshing. I don't think they could have pulled of the variety in Kalos without the Unova 'fillers' available to create variation with. It's great how Reflection Cave (Mr. Mime, Ferroseed, Roggenrola, Swoobat, etc.), Terminus Cave (Graveler, Lairon, Noibat, Durant, etc.), Glittering Cave (different method of encountering, Machop, Onix, Mawile, Dwebble, etc.), and Connecting Cave (Zubat, Whismur, Axew, Meditite, etc.) all have their own identity and atmosphere. I do not mind the fact that there are, for example, three types of bat-like Pokemon in Kalos at all (Zubat, Woobat, Noibat).
So in the end I think the variety aspect that you talked about in your post is what matters more than the fact that some designs have the same kind of origins.
I actually don't mind the huge amounts of Zubat and Geodude...
Because I use this handy dandy device called a Repel.
Because I use this handy dandy device called a Repel.
I thought Gen 4 was the current whipping boy of the hate-dom, but honestly it's so subjective that the current unfavorite of Pokemon should come with the qualifier "at the moment." I remember when Gen 3 was the unloved middle child, man how times change.
Then only semi-legitamite gripe about Gen5 pokemon were the expy's (or, obvious stand-ins for other pokemon, like woobat=zubat, roggenrola=geodude, Timburr=Machop, even Zoruark=Lucario) taking some of the wind out of the 'ALL ORIGINAL POKEMON' marketing point for Black/White. Although I did end up appreciating the back-to-basics limited-setlist of those games, giving them more of a challenge since you had less options to work with. But I like to nuzlocke, so maybe I'm biased. And of course, I do like a lot of Gen 5's pokemon like Scrafty, Jellicent, and Galvantula among others.
Gen 4 gets called over complicated a lot, especially on the new evolutions for older pokemon introduced in that era (some don't like the legendary designs that much either, and disregarding competitive appeal you gotta admit they aren't as popular as their other-gen rivals except Arceus and Darkrai). While I still like a lot of Gen 4 (Garchomp!), I admit there was trouble in Gen 4.
I like Gliscor, but that is not a very good first impression. At all.
And don't get me started on Magmortar!
At least until Platinum/HG/SS made him kind of cool.
I remember an artist who is on the pokemon design team admitting regrets involving one of the generations, but I forget which one and can't find the interview again. The point was they felt the designs were getting too complicated and busy, lacking appeal and were happy to take more design time on fewer pokemon in Gen 6. I also think they said this is why we didn't get Mega-flygon because they couldn't get an appealing design? Wish I could find this again...
I think the point trying to be made is that people don't want to immediately enter a cave and go "let me use Repel since I already got Zubat/Woobat and Geodude/Roggenrola back from the first cave". They want to go "awesome, a new cave! I wonder what different Pokemon inhabit this cave I can catch". We get it, when we think of a cave we often think of bats hanging from the ceiling and rocks everywhere, but that doesn't necessarily mean each cave needs to have those two kind of Pokemon. Heck, Kalos actually did this right. While each cave did share some Pokemon not all of them had a bat and rock-type in them and if they did it wasn't usually the same bat or Rock-type. When I entered a cave in XY it was the first time I felt curious what I found inside thanks to the massive Regional Pokedex allowing them to have quite a bit of distribution. Though when I played through ORAS as soon as I got the unique Pokemon from that cave I pulled out the repels since each cave had Zubat and Geodude decking the halls.
I also take issue with the fact that they couldn't design a potential Mega-Flygon, considering they have designed pokemon based on sludge and a set of keys ...stage7_4 said:
Sugimori: For Aarune, he needed to have a Pokemon that could use the moves Fly and Secret Power, which are perfect moves for finding Secret Bases. And the only Hoenn Pokemon that wasn’t used by a key character that fit that criteria was Flygon. It does not Mega Evolve, but I really like Flygon.
Interviewer: Key characters often carry a Pokemon that can Mega Evolve, but Flygon is an exception, right?
Sugimori: Flygon has had the potential to have a Mega Evolution since XY, but we were unable to complete a design and so it was dropped from consideration.
- See more at: http://www.gamnesia.com/news/mega-f...ped-due-to-artists-block#sthash.c4DtODJK.dpuf
EspurrTales:
Hmm, from reading that interview I'm wondering whether it was they couldn't think of an idea or maybe they had several ideas and couldn't pick one. As Sugimori said, Flygon had plenty of potential, but unless they give it two (which wouldn't be such a bad idea, Flygon's typing alone could be split to Ground/Dragon and Bug/Dragon) they need to pick one design and there's plenty of directions you can go with it. Will it just be a Flygon +? Change into a Bug/Dragon and regain aspects of Trapinch? It's Dex Entries could provide some inspirations with it being a "Desert Spirit" able to whip up sandstorms (that alone could lead it to getting the Sand Stream Ability which would mean it'll lose Levitate thus probably have to lose the wings and become grounded (then again that wasn't a problem for Mega Charizard X so...)). Before I cross too far into wishlisting, I'll end it here saying it could be that they couldn't pick one idea to finalize so instead of rushing it through they dropped it which you have to respect as it shows they want to give us players a finished and thought out product. Though now with the demand for a Mega Flygon being known it'll probably show up in XYZ... THAT'S IT! That's why new of Z is so late coming out! They need to stall while they finish up Mega Flygon!
Hmm, from reading that interview I'm wondering whether it was they couldn't think of an idea or maybe they had several ideas and couldn't pick one. As Sugimori said, Flygon had plenty of potential, but unless they give it two (which wouldn't be such a bad idea, Flygon's typing alone could be split to Ground/Dragon and Bug/Dragon) they need to pick one design and there's plenty of directions you can go with it. Will it just be a Flygon +? Change into a Bug/Dragon and regain aspects of Trapinch? It's Dex Entries could provide some inspirations with it being a "Desert Spirit" able to whip up sandstorms (that alone could lead it to getting the Sand Stream Ability which would mean it'll lose Levitate thus probably have to lose the wings and become grounded (then again that wasn't a problem for Mega Charizard X so...)). Before I cross too far into wishlisting, I'll end it here saying it could be that they couldn't pick one idea to finalize so instead of rushing it through they dropped it which you have to respect as it shows they want to give us players a finished and thought out product. Though now with the demand for a Mega Flygon being known it'll probably show up in XYZ... THAT'S IT! That's why new of Z is so late coming out! They need to stall while they finish up Mega Flygon!
If there isn't a Mega Flygon in Pokemon Z. I'll be sending a letter of complaint. :///
That's certainly one half of the interview, but I still remember another one regarding artist block and over complicated design regrets, and I want to say it pointed fingers at Gen 4 but I can't find it so I don't want people quoting me on that.I also take issue with the fact that they couldn't design a potential Mega-Flygon, considering they have designed pokemon based on sludge and a set of keys ...
Oh I also managed to find what was said during the interview of the artist:
Sugimori: For Aarune, he needed to have a Pokemon that could use the moves Fly and Secret Power, which are perfect moves for finding Secret Bases. And the only Hoenn Pokemon that wasn’t used by a key character that fit that criteria was Flygon. It does not Mega Evolve, but I really like Flygon.
Interviewer: Key characters often carry a Pokemon that can Mega Evolve, but Flygon is an exception, right?
Sugimori: Flygon has had the potential to have a Mega Evolution since XY, but we were unable to complete a design and so it was dropped from consideration.
- See more at: http://www.gamnesia.com/news/mega-f...ped-due-to-artists-block#sthash.c4DtODJK.dpuf
Muk, and any Gen 1 pokemon really, I'm more forgiving on because it was the first gen. It's like going back into an artist's portfolio, pulling out an old fingerpainting from when they were 5 and shouting "gee remember how much you sucked back then you hack!" While it doesn't invalidate your distaste in Muk or others, it's not exactly relevant to today either.
Klefki I like a lot, it made me confident that Gamefreak wasn't going to make a bunch of Tinkerbell clones for their fairy types.
And what is everyone's beef with object-based pokemon? The main counterpoint is that they are unoriginal designs, but what exactly is so unoriginal about bringing life to non-living objects
and what is so original about just re-styling actual animals
or just making direct mythological references?
I guess what I'm trying to say is you can like what you like and dislike what you don't, but how "original" a concept is remains subjective. There is no true originality, everything has roots in our observations of life. So if you don't like it by the way it looks then that's okay, but "it's an object so it sucks" isn't a valid criticism.
Last edited:
Don't remember the regret part, but I do remember the artist block part. Sugimori started but couldn't think of what to do for the Gen VI Legendaries so another artist, Yusuke Ohmura, took over until the end when Sugimori took over again to add the finishing touches.That's certainly one half of the interview, but I still remember another one regarding artist block and over complicated design regrets, and I want to say it pointed fingers at Gen 4 but I can't find it so I don't want people quoting me on that.
Muk, and any Gen 1 pokemon really, I'm more forgiving on because it was the first gen. It's like going back into an artist's portfolio, pulling out an old fingerpainting from when they were 5 and shouting "gee remember how much you sucked back then you hack!" While it doesn't invalidate your distaste in Muk or others, it's not exactly relevant to today either.
Klefki I like a lot, it made me confident that Gamefreak wasn't going to make a bunch of Tinkerbell clones for their fairy types.
And what is everyone's beef with object-based pokemon? The main counterpoint is that they are unoriginal designs, but what exactly is so unoriginal about bringing life to non-living objects
and what is so original about just re-styling actual animals
or just making direct mythological references?
I guess what I'm trying to say is you can like what you like and dislike what you don't, but how "original" a concept is remains subjective. There is no true originality, everything has roots in our observations of life. So if you don't like it by the way it looks then that's okay, but "it's an object so it sucks" isn't a valid criticism.
Dullahan might be a bit tricky to do. First off I imagine the design process would be tricky (can't really have a headless humanoid creature riding a red-eyed horse pulling a carriage, they're going to have to combine those three elements into one and "headless" doesn't really combine with "red-eyes" unless you get creative. Heck, they may just too the carriage idea out as well and just make a headless horse so it encompasses all the headless horseman myths (though I suppose they can link back to the Dullahan by having it be part Fairy-type)). Anycase, you'll probably have to wait until they do a region based on a place where a headless horseman myth is popular (Ireland specifically for Dullahan, though there is also Germany).
We even have Pokemon based on phrases and concepts:
(there's more than just these two, but I feel they best represent my case. For those who don't know they're based on the phrase "don't caste your pearls before swine")
And while talking about design might as well plug my thread about the "repository" of things that haven't been made into Pokemon yet.
Next time I catch a Spoink, naming it Stephen.We even have Pokemon based on phrases and concepts:
(there's more than just these two, but I feel they best represent my case. For those who don't know they're based on the phrase "don't caste your pearls before swine")
And while talking about design might as well plug my thread about the "repository" of things that haven't been made into Pokemon yet.
CTNC
Doesn't know how to attack
Now I want to rename my Shiny Grumpig, but I restarted the game I caught it on for a Nuzloke. :(Next time I catch a Spoink, naming it Stephen.
Hmm... Let's see...
•I think the Elite 4 and champion need perfect IVs. This is because A. They are professionals
B. Generation 6 apparently made this a lot easier
C. They're a universal test of a trainer's skill at Pokemon training, which really shouldn't be messed with by some kids getting opponents with bad IVs and some getting opponents with good ones.
•I think striving for perfect IVs is ridiculous. Sure, get stats suited for the set you're going to use, but do you really need 31 Attack AND 31 Sp. Attack? It's not like I battle competitively, but hearing everyone complain about not having good IVs is tiresome.
•I hate Garchomp. Why does everyone like it? It's a physical Dragon-and-Ground-type land sharkfrom a game that ran slower than when I tried running a HG romhack on my cellphone. I guess Cynthoil uses it if you can reach the Pokemon League before the lag kills you. Sure, it's useful competitively as a fast Earthquake, but I don't see any charm or likeability outside of that.
EDIT: Yes, taking a shot at Diamond and Pearl was wrong. They're okay games, I just haven't gotten around to beating either of them yet. Just ignore the struck-through portions.
•I think the Elite 4 and champion need perfect IVs. This is because A. They are professionals
B. Generation 6 apparently made this a lot easier
C. They're a universal test of a trainer's skill at Pokemon training, which really shouldn't be messed with by some kids getting opponents with bad IVs and some getting opponents with good ones.
•I think striving for perfect IVs is ridiculous. Sure, get stats suited for the set you're going to use, but do you really need 31 Attack AND 31 Sp. Attack? It's not like I battle competitively, but hearing everyone complain about not having good IVs is tiresome.
•I hate Garchomp. Why does everyone like it? It's a physical Dragon-and-Ground-type land shark
EDIT: Yes, taking a shot at Diamond and Pearl was wrong. They're okay games, I just haven't gotten around to beating either of them yet. Just ignore the struck-through portions.
Last edited:
IV's were a mistake to begin with that really don't add anything but another Skinner Box to an already borderline Skinner Box game. If every pokemon just had 31 (or even all zero's or some other set number) we'd lose nothing. They're supposed to add character to each individual pokemon, but in reality it's just a way to mathematically say one pokemon of the same species is inferior to another statistically. I think natures were a better implementation of what they were going for.
Uh, while not liking Garchomp is one thing, isn't blaming it all on the questionable quality of Diamond and Pearl more than a little off topic? It's not like the dragon-jetplane-landshark had anything to do with that.
As for it's popularity, well I don't need to state my reasons...
Last edited: