Pokemon Now VS Pokemon Then?
View Single Post
October 10th, 2012 (10:58 AM).
Join Date: Jun 2012
Originally Posted by
K, if you really like the new ones. But it wouldn't bother anyone to make simpler and more natural designs I guess like Rapidash>Zebstrika and Muk>Garbodor.
Curious. What d'you mean by more natural, and why does more simplistic equal better, according to you? And exactly why is Zebstrika worse than Rapidash --apart from the fact that it's from Gen V -- in your opinion?
Personally, I can't stand Watchog, that thing. . . that thing is horrible. xD Vanilluxe isn't my favourite, but it definitely does have a unique and creative design, I think, and then there's the real gems, like Krookodile, Chandelure, Volcorona, Zebstrika, Serperior, Samurott, Excadrill, Archeops, and so forth. Unfortunately, I'm not all too familiar with the Gen V 'dex as it were, but I love this gen.
And hmm... maybe Casteliacones ARE based upon the Vanillish line...
Not only that, but from it's Pokedex entries, the Vanillish line are stalactites, anyway! (Or was it the other one. . . ?) They're able to justify it well with the 'dex, and the assumption is that ice cream scoops were based on the Pokemon, but there have been Pokemon that came into existence after the object they're based on, according to the 'dex, like Voltorb and Muk, for example. Personally, I rather like the lore for them. :D
Something to remember, though, is that nostalgia will always affect judgement of a long-running series. You'll be remembering what the series was like when you were an easily impressed child, for the most part, and so you'll still tend to be happy with sub-par things like Diglett. XD I know, I used to hate Gen V and say that GF was running out of ideas, and so on and so forth myself.
View Public Profile
Send a private message to RenegadeShroom
Find all posts by RenegadeShroom
Find threads started by RenegadeShroom