• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

5th Gen Do you think that some of the Unova Pokemon don't even look like Pokemon?

Oryx

CoquettishCat
13,184
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 30, 2015
While I do agree that there's no criteria for what's a pokemon or not, I think what he's trying to say is that some of the newer pokemon look like a copy-and-paste of older pokemon or from other cartoon shows, or are abnormally simplistic. While there were indeed pokemon in the older generations considered "bland" or "unoriginal" (Geodude is just a rock with arms and a face) it seems to be more noticeable this generation.

Lilipip/Herdier/Stoutland just look like ordinary dogs. I know they're normal types, and I like them, but still...
While Sawk and Throh are really cool with a really cool concept, I personally find it rather strange that they're naturally wearing full articles of clothing like gis. However, I would also find them strange without their gis...
Ducklett, again, is just a duck, only blue with cartoony eyes.
The Vanillite family, while cute and all, seems like it would be more comfortable in Fighting Foodons...

As I said before, there's no criteria for what's a pokemon is supposed to be, and there are bland or lame-looking pokemon in every generation, but the Unova pokemon, despite having many amazing-looking pokemon I love, also has those pokemon that stick out like a sore thumb.

Have they become more noticeable in general or have you grown up to become a more critical young adult instead of a less critical child? I think the latter is far more likely.

From the fighting belt on Machamp to the spoons every single Alakazam has to the commercial, obviously human-made magnets that Magnemite/ton are made out of to Hitmonchan's outfit and gloves to Jynx's dress, Pokemon has always had creatures with human items. Like I said before, you say they didn't 'stick out' to you, but that's not because it's less obvious. It's because you were younger when you were introduced to them, so you grew up not questioning their designs.

Here are some Gen I Pokemon that are merely an animal with 1-2 changed features, similar to Ducklett:

Spoiler:
 

DARKSHADE

Waiting.. In the Shadows..
699
Posts
16
Years


Have they become more noticeable in general or have you grown up to become a more critical young adult instead of a less critical child? I think the latter is far more likely.

From the fighting belt on Machamp to the spoons every single Alakazam has to the commercial, obviously human-made magnets that Magnemite/ton are made out of to Hitmonchan's outfit and gloves to Jynx's dress, Pokemon has always had creatures with human items. Like I said before, you say they didn't 'stick out' to you, but that's not because it's less obvious. It's because you were younger when you were introduced to them, so you grew up not questioning their designs.

Here are some Gen I Pokemon that are merely an animal with 1-2 changed features, similar to Ducklett:

Spoiler:


Honestly I don't think it's just the 'Animal with a few changes' that makes this generation not as good as the others.. it's the new artwork style, it just isn't as good as the old one used to be.
 

blue

gucci
21,057
Posts
16
Years
Well I've acknowledged them as Pokémon now and to me, they're fine.. they can't make them all too similar I mean there is 649 so you are limited to creations, if anything I think they are doing a great job.
 

-ty-

Don't Ask, Just Tell
792
Posts
14
Years
  • Age 32
  • USA
  • Seen May 2, 2015


You can't have it both ways though. You can have original ones that don't look like Pokemon, or ones that rip off other Pokemon but do look like Pokemon.

Agree with this 100 percent!
 

SnowpointQuincy

Seeker of FRIEND CODES
1,286
Posts
15
Years
Also, i wanted to add this:

There are 649 pokemon - You are NOT going to like all of them. There are that many pokemon to make sure that you like SOME of them.

I'm not a fan of Gloom/Bellossom, but I'm not complaining about it. Why? Because I can name at least 100 new and old pokemon that I adore so, so, much!


I have a Ducklet holding an Everstone named Duck Rodgers. I don't know why, but I love him more than most people! (might be exaggerating a little bit.)
 

hiff8

Gotta Derp em all
303
Posts
14
Years
  • Seen Apr 4, 2015
The only ones that really stuck me like that ( at first) were Sawk and Throh, they looked like fan art to me more then pokemon

TRUBBISH IS NOT A POKEMON!!!! It's a friggin garbage bag. WTF? Did someone take out the trash and turn around to see it randomly come to life? I think Trubbish is the weirdest one ever.
.

And Grimer is a pile of Purple mud, i really never saw why people disliked trubbish so much, he was like the only pokemon i used up until the elite 4, he seemed just as legit an idea as any other pokemon
 
Last edited:

Victini

Guest
0
Posts
b&w pokemon suck, they look like cheap rip off's of digimon..


Spoiler:


I am inclined to disagree.

All Pokemon gens have strange Pokemon that may or may not look like they belong. I for one do not feel there should ever be a label placed on what a Pokemon can or cannot look like. A Pokemon is a Pokemon. It doesn't have a description to what it is supposed to look like... i-it is just that.

I find this opinion to be very strange. I personally think if our Gen 1 was filled with Gen 5 Pokemon we would love them as we do Gen 1 now, and cherish them no matter how they look... but if our Gen 5 had all Gen 1 Pokemon, "Oh this Pokemon looks like a Digimon", "This isn't a Pokemon, it's a red and white ball!", "How creative, a pink flying cat that can use all the Pokemon moves. PFF." etc etc...

T-that's just my two cents, anyways...
 

Mr. Magius

  
244
Posts
16
Years


Have they become more noticeable in general or have you grown up to become a more critical young adult instead of a less critical child? I think the latter is far more likely.
...Amen. O.o

Spoiler:


I am inclined to disagree.

All Pokemon gens have strange Pokemon that may or may not look like they belong. I for one do not feel there should ever be a label placed on what a Pokemon can or cannot look like. A Pokemon is a Pokemon. It doesn't have a description to what it is supposed to look like... i-it is just that.

I find this opinion to be very strange. I personally think if our Gen 1 was filled with Gen 5 Pokemon we would love them as we do Gen 1 now, and cherish them no matter how they look... but if our Gen 5 had all Gen 1 Pokemon, "Oh this Pokemon looks like a Digimon", "This isn't a Pokemon, it's a red and white ball!", "How creative, a pink flying cat that can use all the Pokemon moves. PFF." etc etc...
Very good point.

And Digimon are "digital monsters"... aren't Pokémon digital monsters as well? The only reason Digimon have their distinct style is because of the artist(s). If a Digimon was drawn by an artist of the Pokémon series, it would probably blend in perfectly.

No matter what, there will always be people who will complain. Game Freak went for a unique style, but in my opinion, stayed remarkably true to the classic 'Pokémon' flavour, probably closest to Generation II. If they chose to take inspiration from Generation I's extremely simple style, there would be more people complaining about how plain and bland the Pokémon are.

I especially liked how Game Freak chose to not give a hint if there was a shortage of concepts (although for some reason people tend to think that >_>). We were given another duck, another cat, another dog; but optimistically, there are tons of things you can do with just the concept of one animal... then there's even more creativity involved when it comes to evolution (especially branch evolution), like adding a new type, or regional mythology.
 

Oryx

CoquettishCat
13,184
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 30, 2015
I think a lot of the cries of lack of originality half stem from parallels to other generations, and half stem from the ones that don't parallel. There's a group of people that hate the unique ones (either they're not close enough to a specific animal or they don't look like creatures at all), and then there are people that hate the ones that parallel other generations (they couldn't think of a new idea, instead copied an old one). I'm sure in both cases they were very distinct decisions by Game Freak; since Unova is supposed to be a new start, they were already forcing you to use Pokemon you weren't comfortable with yet. It's comforting to see things that are familiar and similar to what you're used to in that situation.
 

Ho-Oh

used Sacred Fire!
35,992
Posts
18
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jul 1, 2023
I think the non-animals are more detailed than the past generations ones, or at least to us now. When we saw Nidoran growing up we didn't pay attention to the small details, but now we're older we tend to do that, which basically sums up what Toujours said. We're fine with animals like Minccino because they're what we accept. We're not fine with Trubbish because we'd rather have Mr. Mime. Clearly because you see mimes everywhere and not rubbish bags...

Unova reflects reality in their designs, past generations don't do that as much.

If it weren't for battling I'd consider Sinnoh least like Pokemon because I spent the least amount of time with them, btw, so it's just getting used to them, etc.
 

hiff8

Gotta Derp em all
303
Posts
14
Years
  • Seen Apr 4, 2015
I think the real main reason people don't like them is because they tried to go more retro and break the mold
 

fatcatfuller

Master of HG and Black
19
Posts
12
Years
  • Age 22
  • Seen Jun 6, 2012
I have the 2 games and the game has old pokemon after you finish the story. they still look like pokemon. Munna defenetly.
 

Glow Worm's Not Glowing

Not-So-Masterful
58
Posts
15
Years
Well, I definitely see where the OP is coming from, in the sense that some of the Pokemon were a little ... different, but I think different is okay.

And to be honest, I always look at Pokemon as the "Pocket Monsters" they were always referred to as. If, in the Pokemon world, my t.v. jumped up, sprouted wings, had eyes, and shot fire from it's two slits that it calls nostrils, I'd still say "That's a Poke! Now I'mma catch it!" because it's a monster ... that I can fit in my pocket.

If it's a bunch of gears, a pile of garbage, or a flaming pile of poop, if it can be caught in a ball, it is a Pokemon, mainly because in ANY society, that is a "monster". Trainers just deal with their monsters in a slightly more peaceful fashion. (fainting and catching instead of hunting down and murdering all of its kind)

Just my opinion, though. c:
 

SnowpointQuincy

Seeker of FRIEND CODES
1,286
Posts
15
Years
Unova Pokemon look like they all came from Unova. It gives the location an identity and it makes the pokemon feel more real knowing they are 'native' to one place more than another.
 

DARKSHADE

Waiting.. In the Shadows..
699
Posts
16
Years
I have to say this thread has really helped me get a little fonder of the Unova and Sinnoh Pokemon, I've played all the games to date, since I was about 3.
And I figured I'd post here, because I just stumbled across this picture;

pokmon-the-more-they-stay-the-same.png


I still have a lot of opposition toward some of the new Pokemon, but I think it's something worth thinking about.

And I play the hell out of Pokemon regardless, just thought I'd point that out.
 
Back
Top