PDA

View Full Version : Μy list of nintendo screw ups for pokemon..with a possiblity of logics no where to be


Mitchman
June 8th, 2008, 11:40 AM
Yes im trying to say nintendo did some screwed up things with game freak. I have a list and I know people are dying to rant on some idiot that creates a list. Rant away but you know im right.
1. The whole venonat thing. Im bothered by it and hould have been fixed right away.
2. Gold silver and crystal. Gee what a stupid mistake. Seems like a name good for gen 4 got in gen 2 and a name good for gen 2 got in gen 4. Diamond pearl and platinum. Right nintendo you should have seen the perfect-ness(even a word?!) of platinum for the gen 2. Platinum is a METAL thats kinda like a fusion of gold and silver. Gee whats a 3rd game in simple words? Crystal is good fitting for gen 4 cause gee diamonds pearls and crystals are all minerals. Gah nintendo.
3. Generation 3 in all. Sure new features but hey it was basically an upgraded 1st gen. Oh wait sorry thats part of this gen. Um no technically hoenn is something nintendo probably regret.
4. Shaymin new form is an evo like pokemon god damnit!
5. Evolutions and forms co-exist and are the same now cause of what I said in complaint number 4.
6. That is all oh and um pokemon designs are good but got a little careless. Next gen do something right.

~*!*~Tatsujin Gosuto~*!*~
June 14th, 2008, 06:09 AM
Every game screws up at least one thing in their games.

1. The whole venonat thing. Im bothered by it and hould have been fixed right away.

Whats wrong with Venonat? It looks perfectly fin to me

2. Gold silver and crystal. Gee what a stupid mistake. Seems like a name good for gen 4 got in gen 2 and a name good for gen 2 got in gen 4. Diamond pearl and platinum. Right nintendo you should have seen the perfect-ness(even a word?!) of platinum for the gen 2. Platinum is a METAL thats kinda like a fusion of gold and silver. Gee whats a 3rd game in simple words? Crystal is good fitting for gen 4 cause gee diamonds pearls and crystals are all minerals. Gah nintendo.

The name of the games don't matter, as long as its a good game right?


3. Generation 3 in all. Sure new features but hey it was basically an upgraded 1st gen. Oh wait sorry thats part of this gen. Um no technically hoenn is something nintendo probably regret.

Nothing wrong with Houen to me,


4. Shaymin new form is an evo like pokemon god damnit!

Que?
right.


:t354:TG

MissMegano
June 14th, 2008, 06:27 AM
1) Maybe they wanted something for us to rant about ^^ No, actually you're right.
2) I would've never thought about that. It would sound a heck of alot better.
3) I loved hoenn. The new pokemon had great designs, and overall, the game was fun. Between gyms, the travelling was exciting, with the weather effects and weird paths. Heck, even the battles were fun!
4) Christ, it is ugly. Doesn't look legendary at all.
6) There were a few really good ones, though, like Buizel and Infernape.

Mitchman
June 14th, 2008, 06:42 AM
Yes there where a few. Also number 7 is not a screw up but more of an oddity.
7. Why make platinum so different from diamond/pearl. I mean yeah its a new game but its never that distant from the duo it came from.

Storm-DC
June 14th, 2008, 01:53 PM
I agree on Hoenn, bus nothing else

Gary, the Magic Fairy
June 14th, 2008, 02:59 PM
1. The whole venonat thing. Im bothered by it and hould have been fixed right away.I have no idea what's wrong with Venonat. Nothing is -obviously- wrong with it. o.o

2. Gold silver and crystal. Gee what a stupid mistake. Seems like a name good for gen 4 got in gen 2 and a name good for gen 2 got in gen 4. Diamond pearl and platinum. Right nintendo you should have seen the perfect-ness(even a word?!) of platinum for the gen 2. Platinum is a METAL thats kinda like a fusion of gold and silver. Gee whats a 3rd game in simple words? Crystal is good fitting for gen 4 cause gee diamonds pearls and crystals are all minerals. Gah nintendo.Well, the best explanation I can think of is the version mascots. Suicune makes water "crystal clear" or something to that effect? Giratina and "Platina" (I believe that's what it's called in Japanese) have similar word endings.

Gold, Silver, Crystal, Diamond, and Platinum are all minerals. Pearls are made by oysters. O_o

3. Generation 3 in all. Sure new features but hey it was basically an upgraded 1st gen. Oh wait sorry thats part of this gen. Um no technically hoenn is something nintendo probably regret.The 3rd was the worst one, in my opinion, but I don't see them regretting it. It DID make them tons of money. XD

4. Shaymin new form is an evo like pokemon god damnit!
5. Evolutions and forms co-exist and are the same now cause of what I said in complaint number 4.Forms and evolutions aren't really THAT similar. They don't really increase power, just change it. And the switch isn't permanent, so that's a big difference. idk. :\

7. Why make platinum so different from diamond/pearl. I mean yeah its a new game but its never that distant from the duo it came from.How do you even KNOW? The game isn't even released yet. We have like- 8 pictures. XD

JX Valentine
June 14th, 2008, 03:00 PM
1. The whole venonat thing. Im bothered by it and hould have been fixed right away.

For once, I agree with Queen Boo. I don't understand what's so bad about Venonat. If you're bringing up the "Venonat evolving into Venomoth doesn't make sense" argument that was around awhile ago, then it's not like Pokemon evolutions have always made complete sense. *motions to Remoraid and Octillery*

2. Gold silver and crystal. Gee what a stupid mistake.

It was what they had in mind at the time, to match the fact that Ho-oh, representing the sun, also represents gold. Likewise for Lugia > the moon > silver. Suicune represented crystals, not only because of the crest on its head but also the fact that it alludes to crystal-clear water.

They also didn't have Diamond and Pearl in their heads at all back in the late 90's, so they probably didn't realize they would need to reserve the names Gold and Silver for a different generation. (Read: It never crossed their minds that adding in "Crystal" to represent a blue Water-type Pokemon wouldn't make sense.)

perfect-ness(even a word?!)

No. Perfection.

Platinum is a METAL thats kinda like a fusion of gold and silver.

Actually, it's not. While it's a precious metal, this is like saying diamonds are like rubies and sapphires fused. Same class of material, different substances.

Not only that, but platinum is a silver-colored material anyway. Given the fact that Gen II already sports a silver-colored game, adding in another one would have resulted in confusion between the two.

for gen 4 cause gee diamonds pearls and crystals are all minerals.

Actually, a pearl isn't technically a mineral in the sense that diamonds and crystals are. They're actually hardened chemical deposits that form around an irritant in a clam or bivalve's body. In other words, it's like taking the gold you dig out of your nose and calling it a gemstone. Because of that, it actually falls into a slightly different group of gemstone and bears more in common with amber than diamond.

The only reason why Nintendo chose it to represent Palkia, meanwhile, is not only because Palkia is a water dragon but also because pearls, like diamonds, are normally pale in color but can rarely sport different colors (pink for pearls, blue for diamonds -- among other colors for each).

3. Generation 3 in all. Sure new features but hey it was basically an upgraded 1st gen.

While I'm not wild about Gen III, I have to argue that Gen III was responsible for changing the face of competitive battling with everything from natures and abilities to the way some moves (such as Rain Dance) worked. I wouldn't call it an upgraded Gen I. And if I did, I'd be calling Gen II and IV the same.

4. Shaymin new form is an evo like pokemon god damnit!

Not sure what you're actually even saying here.

I'll agree in saying that Shaymin's alternate form is crap (if that is what you're saying), but I don't think Shaymin should really get an evolution. It's a legendary Pokemon, after all. Giving it an evolution would probably be questioning its position as the god of flowers and nature.

5. Evolutions and forms co-exist and are the same now cause of what I said in complaint number 4.

...Also not sure what you're talking about here.

Sometimes, alternate forms represent different environments. Examples:

- Shellos and Gastrodon's east and west forms could indicate a difference in water qualities (for example, difference in acidity -- which can change certain organisms sensitive to acidity either blue or pink, depending on the level of pH) in east and west Sinnoh. Ergo, the two forms of each can't coexist because Shellos and Gastrodon need those different water qualities in order to develop as they do.

- Burmy and Wormadam can't coexist with their own alternate forms because those forms represent where a Burmy or Wormadam is located, possibly for camouflage. You can't have a grass-form Burmy existing alongside a steel-form Burmy because one Burmy would want to change its cloak to match the other's because of the environment they both most likely are in.

Evolutions, meanwhile, do coexist. If not in the anime, in the games -- such as Route 213, where you can encounter both a Buizel and a Floatzel. Likewise, in many patches of water, you can fish up both Magikarp and Gyarados, depending on your rod. You might not find evolutions lumped together with preevolutions in certain areas, probably because of a level difference. For example, early in the game, you'll be able to find Starly but not Staraptor because a level five starter just wouldn't be able to take down a level 37 (at the very minimum) Staraptor but wouldn't have much of a problem with a level two to four Starly.

In later areas, however, I do see what you mean.

6. That is all oh and um pokemon designs are good but got a little careless. Next gen do something right.

This I do agree with.

Edit: And agreed with FLUFFY KITTEN HUGS about point seven. No one really knows what the game is like at the moment because all we have is a handful of screenshots and a crapload of speculation based on said screenshots.

Horizon
June 14th, 2008, 03:06 PM
With point number seven, you're basically proving one of those situations where you can't win, whatever you do. If you make it too similar, people will complain it's too similar. So you make it different, and people will complain it's too different.

Mitchman
June 14th, 2008, 10:34 PM
Well with 7 although all we have is pics we also have some clues to the story. Its based on sinnohs climate drastically dropping in temparature and something more. Also with point 1 its about venonat not evolving into butterfree. With point 4 and 5 im trying to say that the new form alotugh nice is kinda lie saying a pokemon doesnt evolve it changes forms only.

JX Valentine
June 15th, 2008, 07:42 AM
Well with 7 although all we have is pics we also have some clues to the story. Its based on sinnohs climate drastically dropping in temparature and something more.

I kinda didn't get that from the few images anyone has of Platnium that really don't seem to indicate any possibility that we're looking at RSE all over again (http://serebii.net/platinum/pics.shtml). Then again, I haven't been paying too close attention to speculation threads, given the fact that it's difficult to tell what's fact and what's a bad translation of a magazine page (or the official Japanese website, for that matter).

Also with point 1 its about venonat not evolving into butterfree.

As I've implied before, Venonat should be with Venomoth either way.

Basically, the logic behind Caterpie > Metapod > Butterfree is this: caterpillar > pupa > butterfly. Venonat is, in actuality, a gnat, not a caterpillar or a pupa, so it can't represent a member of the rapid evolution chain that the production team wanted out of Butterfree. That is, it really just doesn't fit into the Butterfree family. It doesn't fit into Venomoth's either, but still.

With point 4 and 5 im trying to say that the new form alotugh nice is kinda lie saying a pokemon doesnt evolve it changes forms only.

Given the fact that most of the form changes that Nintendo are giving Pokemon involve...

A. Environment changes...
B. Legendary Pokemon...

...It makes a bit of sense to have said form changes. As I've mentioned before, environment changes are logical because organisms can take on different appearances, based on what surroundings they were raised in or for camouflage purposes. In this case, it's possible for a Pokemon to evolve as well as change shape (except in the case of Castform), so there really shouldn't be a problem here. They still can't coexist naturally, however, given the fact that their environment would naturally determine one form or another, not multiple forms at the same time.

As for legendary Pokemon, their form changes are simply a display of their power, an allusion to the mythological gods' ability to change shape themselves as well as a statement that the legendary Pokemon possess abilities beyond the ordinary Pokemon. So, yes, for the legendary Pokemon, they really can only change form because, well, they're more or less gods or mythological creatures in the Pokemon world. There can't be anything stronger than a Pokemon already classified as a legendary, so instead, if the production team needs to give a Pokemon a different shape or set of abilities, they allow it to change forms instead of evolving.

If you meant in general, evolution hasn't been taken out of the game, obviously. If Nintendo were emphasizing changes in form above evolution, you wouldn't have seen so many Pokemon being brought back in Gen IV to gain new evolutions or preevolutions. So, really, I still don't see why different forms are a problem.

Katnip
June 15th, 2008, 03:46 PM
I got two things to say, and two things only:
1. There's nothing wrong with venonat.
2. Hoenn is fine, just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can say that it's a mistake. Which is basically what you're saying.