Possible "Evil" Appeal?

[Miss Doronjo]

The general idea of Good vs. Evil is generally apparent in pokemon games, with the speculation of Gen 6 not being any different. However, in these games, will it be possible that 'true evil' is applied to pokemon? Now, the main reason this thread has been created, is because I've saw some heavy speculation that perhaps pokemon's willpower will become a key role in this games' plot. And this willpower... might be bad. Or 'evil'. So, will there be an abundance of good and evil, not necessarily applied to humans, but to pokemon? Do you think that 'evil will powered' pokemon will become apparent in these games? Or, could there be pokemon be represented by "evil"? What does this evil appeal might mean for this generation of the pokeworld?

First of all, recognize that it's understandable that pokemon can't be 'truly' evil, but only simply follow the commands of their trainers - who can be good or bad trainers, depending on what decision making they do. However, what if the world in pokemon can manifest a willpower that would not appeal to ethical tastes? Or if you take a look at 'evil' from a philosophical belief, it can portrayed as a 'lack of goodness'. For example, Mewtwo on the First Pokemon Movie - he thought that humans were greedy, selfish beings, and he hated the pokemon that served them, so he himself created a plot to round up trainers together, and seized their pokemon, creating carbon copies of them. Well, some people call that 'evil', some call it a misunderstanding, but it can still be portrayed as a 'lack of goodness'.

Well, eh, bear with me, just to bounce some ideas, take a look at a theory that I've seen that people are making about Xerneas & Yveltal. Could they represent good and evil? If you've looked at a previous thread I made, Scientific Waves, it talks about how there maaaay be possibilities that Xerneas can represent light. Yuveltal may represent darkness, and the whole light vs darkness can be portrayed as symbols:

Light

• Purity
• Order
• Safety
• Righteousness
• Possibly Dictatorship

Darkness

• Uncertainty
• Tragedy
• Freedom
• Alienation
• Blindness

The bad traits generally outweighs the positive traits of darkness, so would Yuveltal be 'bad' in a poetic sense? Or in a more philosophical sense, have a 'lack of goodness'?

Well, then again, look at another theory - since there are going to be about 50-70 more pokemon, eventually we'll get to pokemon #666. According to western tastes, 666 generally means the 'hour of the beast' or just general triple unlucky numbers. What could pokemon 666 represent; could it represent an idea of believed "evil", like.. some sort of devil? Then again, pokemon doesn't really use religious beliefs in their general themes, and Japan usually pictures the number '4' as an unluckier number than '666', in which '444' was Gabite. Then again, would it appeal to international beliefs and use pokemon 666 as an 'evil' belief?

Then again, could "evil" pokemon be simply created by humans? Ie. Shadow pokemon. Cipher created Shadow pokemon, which are pokemon who's 'hearts' are closed by artificial means. Especially Lugia, or XD001. These Shadow Pokemon are violent - even so much that they'd attack trainers during battle. Could these games have pokemon that act similar to Shadow Pokemon?

Any other thoughts? Again, do you think there could be 'evil' pokemon in these games?

[PokémonShinySilver]

I don't think Game Freak would follow the same patterns as what Genius Sonority did with their Pokémon games in the storyline. Though it does indeed sound like a good idea to have something very similar to the Shadow Pokémon from Pokémon Colosseum in Pokémon X and Y.

If it does happen, I would like to see some sort of device that takes control of the Pokémon, like how the Red Chain did in the anime with Dialga and Palkia. Something like that might end up making an appearance or something, but it would be interesting. Which would indeed be pretty close enough to good vs evil sort of thing. ;)

But not necessarily applied to humans, but to Pokémon? I don't think that's ever going to happen, knowing Game Freak. xD

[The_Mew]

What if the Villainous team is actually lead by a pokemon? Like maybe a (pseudo-)legendary?

[Venitardus]

Originally Posted by The_Mew

What if the Villainous team is actually lead by a pokemon? Like maybe a (pseudo-)legendary?

That would be an interesting twist to the game

[RedWing]

The possibility of "evil" in Pokemon has always been something that's intrigued me, but the execution has always been the troubling bit.

Pokemon Colosseum and Gale of Darkness played with the idea of shutting down a Pokemon's heart, but that's not necessarily "Evil" on the Pokemon's part. My reasoning is that the Pokemon, having its heart locked, acts out of aggression and primal instinct, not evil intent or malicious purpose.

In the anime and manga, we've seen examples of Pokemon that are considered "bad" based on the actions and commands of their Trainers. However, we've never seen a Pokemon that has been truly malicious for the sake of being evil.

So, no, I don't think we'll be seeing any sort of "Evil" unless it is somehow influenced by humans or a third-party force. Pokemon have always been portrayed as creatures that enjoy battle and can, in time, learn to enjoy the company of humans and battling for them as partners.

In every example of "Evil" in Pokemon, the cause has always been humans or a third-party: Mewtwo was deemed "evil" because he thought that TR's actions in creating him were selfish and evil; the Pokemon belonging to members of evil organizations are only considered "evil" because they follow the orders of their Trainers who, as shocking as it may seem, are human also and more than likely have compassion for their Pokemon that they mask behind malicious intent in front of the public; Even supposedly "Evil" wild Pokemon in the anime have been revealed to only be "evil" because of mistreatment by a former trainer or by fellow wild Pokemon.

"Evil" just isn't in Pokemon.

[Sabrewulf238]

I think the only real reason we can't have "evil" pokemon is because it would be hard to justify catching and raising an evil pokemon. It would never comply with a trainers commands or it would attempt to manipulate it's trainer. (and that's if they're lucky)

I do think it's a bit of a shame though....and it's strange how a pokemon can't be evil. Are pokemon just entirely selfless?

[RedWing]

It's based on the same concept as wild animal psychology. Have you ever met a wild animal that, from birth, has been "evil" or bad-natured? No. It simply doesn't happen. Some would argue that such animals as hyenas or sharks are "evil" based on their cruel, killing instinct, but that is simply how they are engineered to survive.

The reason is that "Evil" exists at all is because of personal experiences, chemical imbalances in the brain or stimuli that is not native to the body.

It is for that reason that evil Pokemon cannot and do not exist in the wild because they have no cause to be evil. There is no outside force that influences them to be so.

[Aerilyn]

I think it has been pretty much established that there are no evil Pokémon, but only Pokémon who may obey the evil commands of their trainers. It's really impossible to say that a Pokémon can just be naturally evil, and RedWing covers those reasons very well.

The only way I see them using the "evil" appeal as a plot is if there's an influence causing said Pokémon to act out maliciously. With the ultimate goal to stop the force behind this and/or find a cure to heal the Pokémon's evil actions. Pokémon Colosseum and XD have explored this similar story nicely, as well as the anime. A prime example is when we see a Pokémon acting out viciously either because something may be causing it physical harm and/or someone is using a mechanism to control their actions and make them appear evil.

Besides, if there were to have ever been a better time to appeal the good vs. evil natures in a Pokémon and not a human, it would have been in Black and White where there was a Ying/Yang overlapping theme.

[Miss Doronjo]

I agree with the points here, but, just allow me to play devil's advocate - aren't certain pokemon way more intelligent than the animals in real life? Wouldn't they be able to find an incentive to be 'evil' all on their own? It has happened before - if you watch a certain episode of pokemon, you'll see that a Togepi is indeed 'evil'. Or has a lack of good if you wanna be philosophical. And no, it had no trainer. It was actually, physically, "bad" on its own.

Would X&Y have pokemon that have hidden motifs such as that? I mean, in the games, independent ideology is indeed possible with legendary pokemon.

[fffire24]

I would argue that Meowth in the anime is pretty evil.

[Miss Anne Thrope]

Originally Posted by RedWing

It's based on the same concept as wild animal psychology. Have you ever met a wild animal that, from birth, has been "evil" or bad-natured? No. It simply doesn't happen. Some would argue that such animals as hyenas or sharks are "evil" based on their cruel, killing instinct, but that is simply how they are engineered to survive.

The reason is that "Evil" exists at all is because of personal experiences, chemical imbalances in the brain or stimuli that is not native to the body.

It is for that reason that evil Pokemon cannot and do not exist in the wild because they have no cause to be evil. There is no outside force that influences them to be so.

A Pokemon could have had a negative personal experience in the wild, causing it to be "evil." Or at least misunderstood and portrayed as the "bad guy." Take a nice little example that a little Pokemon's mother was killed by a human, thus causing the Pokemon to resent all humans. It could get strong, convince other Pokemon of it's bad opinion of humans, create an army and use it to start killing humans.

[RedWing]

That would still be considered an outside force and not something born of the Pokemon's own mind had the event not occurred.

As for the wild Togepi, it wasn't necessarily "evil", per say. I've seen the episode (grudgingly, as I despise the Sinnoh arc) and the Togepi isn't so much "evil" as down-right spoiled. It's a cute, Baby Pokemon that knows Attract, which means it can basically get anyone to do anything for it. As such, it has seen what kind of control it has and uses it to get what it wants.

It's comparable to a little girl who's spoiled by her father and admired by the boys at school. Because she receives constant attention and is given what she wants, she believes she can do whatever she wants to whomever she wants without repercussions. Tl;dr: A spoiled brat.

However, such behavior isn't "evil" because it is all the child/Togepi knows. Now, if the Togpie were to have been raised ethically (We don't know that) and then carried out its mischievous actions, then it would be evil, or at least lacking good.

[Aerilyn]

Originally Posted by Miss Doronjo

I agree with the points here, but, just allow me to play devil's advocate - aren't certain pokemon way more intelligent than the animals in real life? Wouldn't they be able to find an incentive to be 'evil' all on their own? It has happened before - if you watch a certain episode of pokemon, you'll see that a Togepi is indeed 'evil'. Or has a lack of good if you wanna be philosophical. And no, it had no trainer. It was actually, physically, "bad" on its own.

Would X&Y have pokemon that have hidden motifs such as that? I mean, in the games, independent ideology is indeed possible with legendary pokemon.

There's a bad egg joke in there somewhere.

Not to drive off topic, but that Togepi was more naughty and mischievous than anything else. Sure it did some pretty devious tricks, but I wouldn't go as far as call it purely evil.

In the games, there are Pokémon who have a naughty nature. But I wouldn't confuse naughty with being evil. They are very much two different natures. I don't see the games introducing an "Evil" nature into the mix, but if they did in X and Y, then I can imagine something similar to having to purify them maybe. But I still couldn't picture them being naturally born evil.

[Twilight Sky]

Just so I can understand this correctly, this is about Pokemon actually having the willingness to commit evil things, right? Naturally evil Pokemon? If so, then this definitely does sound like an interesting concept to make! Though it's something that I doubt that would be implemented in the games, because I feel that there would have to be some sort of profound storyline on exactly how the Pokemon got "evil" and what can be done to stop this evil Pokemon, and perhaps figure out a way to tun it into good again or something. That's how I see it anyway. x_x A lot of plot depth, indeed, if that makes sense~!

If these Pokemon have creatures that are similar to Shadow Pokemon, then I suppose I could see that happening to some sort of extent, but then there's the problem of possibly finding a solution to turning these Pokemon "normal" again, so to speak, the same nature in which you would have to purify Shadow Pokemon~

[jov0006]

Most ghost Pokemon would be considered 'evil' just check out gengar, litwick and banette, and they're just examples. Would they be considered innately 'evil'?

[Magmaruby and Aquasapphire]

In human terms the most evil yet is proably Darkrai in the games who tortures people in their dreams, sure it has to eat dreams but so do the Drowsy and Munna lines and they don't do that...though Drowsy is creepy taking kids away...
In B2W2 there's hints Darkrai caused the tragedy in the abandoned house with the girl. Also their's Hydreigin which was based off an evil dragon in Slavic-Russian mythology.

Though I don't think pokémon will ever make a fully evil pokémon in game, it'll always have an excuse for it's actions. However that gives the games a humans are the only ones who can be bastards feel.

[Pinkie-Dawn]

When I first read the title of this thread, I thought you mean XY's story favoring the villain team as the most sympathetic characters because their point of views could be something we relate to irl, and we watch in disbelief when our character takes them down to prove that his/her point of view is better than theirs, just like what they did with Team Galactic in D/P. Then I read this thread, and I'll have to say this: Pokemon are no different than wild animals irl, as they're only following their natural instinct, which means they aren't evil (unless it's a cloned velicoraptor).

[C Payne]

I'm not sure why this spiraled so far into some scientific explanation of why something can't be evil, haha; Evil can be a pretty subjective term to a degree because what we see as evil could be seen as good by someone else and vice versa.

(ex: someone could have had a horrible experience with bad Pokemon, whether it was about them killing their family or something, then once they are older they seek to eliminate Pokemon in general. We'd at least see something like that as evil, usually regardless of the reason behind it, while they may see themselves doing good and ridding 'the evil', in this case Pokemon)

In all honesty though, true evil is probably something we wouldn't even be able to comprehend fully anyways. With that in mind, we wouldn't be able to get such a game either way, however, I think it would boil down to how dark Gamefreak would want/be willing to go.

Originally Posted by Magmaruby and Aquasapphire

However that gives the games a humans are the only ones who can be bastards feel.

I know right? It makes me at times regret being a human in the games because humans are the ones causing all of the problems because they(in this case the bad teams) are using them as tools and the Pokemon themselves are really just natural goody goodies at heart. It would be a nice change of pace to see an 'evil' Pokemon be the mastermind behind things, even if their was some deep, deep story behind it. It doesn't even need a completely happy ending; It could just be like a typical hater and say something along the lines of 'You may have beaten me for now but this isn't the last you see of me' as it disappears.


I wish we could have something like the Darkrai from the DS Mystery Dungeon games though, now he was evil, only wanting to enshroud the world in darkness even if it meant screwing up time and space. XD Yeah, call me crazy all you want. I doubt we'd see something like that in a main game though. I was surprised Gamefreak went as far as having Ghetsis almost killing us in B2W2.

[RedWing]

I'd actually be willing to argue about Darkrai...but that'd be entirely off-topic.

Anyway, personally, after inputting my thoughts here, I revise my original thought that it would be intriguing. I'd probably be left with a very sour taste in my mouth if this sort of thing ever came to fruition simply because it wouldn't fit with the nature of Pokemon. As is, I really wasn't a fan of PMD:Explorers because Darkrai was so abjectly evil without rhyme or reason. He was evil for the sake of being evil. It didn't, and still doesn't, fit to me, in Pokemon.

[C Payne]

I wasn't trying to argue about Darkrai though, I just found his personality in PMD:EoT/D to be more fitting of what I pictured him to be to begin with(pokedex entries/anime/movies aside): a being who longed to rule a truly dark and depressing world because, well, it is 'evil'.

Hell, I even agree to an extent that it would possibly be more interesting than fitting.

What's upsetting to me(though it is more of a reality in our world), however, is how we humans are always the ones who so call bring out the evil in things within the Pokemon world. I really doubt that every last Pokemon, without our intervention, would just be some natural goody goody with natural instincts. Maybe so for regular forest/ocean dwelling ones who would probably just do whatever it is they do daily(like regular animals) but don't forget we also have Pokemon that can clearly think for themselves and have a much better understanding of things. Though they are usually portrayed by legendaries or just extremely rare Pokemon, they still exist so there is a (slight) chance that one could be just downright wicked.

[RedWing]

Ah, but you see, it's just like wildlife in the real world. Animals act on instinct, not developed thought like humans do. Sure, monkeys and dolphins can be taught tricks and octopi can open jars, but those are just developments of animals with higher intelligence in an effort to survive. A wild monkey learns to forage for food while a trained one learns to perform for it. There is no serious thought process involved, they're just doing what they have to to survive.

Pokemon, in the wild, are much the same. They eat, sleep, and they battle because it is in their nature. They aren't innately evil. Even the ones with higher thinking capacities, like Alakazam or Lugia, have never been portrayed as evil because they simply aren't. As I previously stated, evil behavior is the result of experiences not normally met in the wild. And, most of those experiences are the cause of human interference.

Now, discussing legendaries, keep in mind that these are powerful creatures with a much longer life span than the average Pokemon. They have had the time to analyze humans and see how we behave and have been given the opportunity to draw their own conclusions as to whether we are friends or foes. If they deem us enemies and rally Pokemon to attack us, are they doing it out of evil, or because they think we are a threat to their well-being? It would be the second choice.

[C Payne]

I'm not saying that there has to be a huge balance between good and bad or that they wouldn't have a good reason to justify attacking us humans(because we can be bad), I just personally find it slightly appalling that we would be at fault for nearly everything truly bad that goes on.

An interesting thought that came into mind is how those legendaries with such high thinking capacities are in a way similar to us humans in that we've grown far more aware of things than the average animal(evolution-wise, but that's for another topic really). If we are capable of these so called wicked deeds(or at least influencing average Pokemon to carry out our wishes, whether they be good or bad), then no doubt a legendary(if only one) could be capable of the same thing.

For all we know, said Pokemon could be all but banished from our world because of the good-natured ones forcing it to flee, which could be a reason we have yet to come across it or everyone has all but forgotten about it(except maybe those who caused it to flee to begin with, who would be more than happy to forget it if they could anyways).

I can see where you are getting at but this is where I'm coming from.

[RedWing]

I really don't see how it's that appalling that humans are the cause of the world's turmoils. It's truth. If Man did not exist, or at least existed in a much smaller number, than a majority of the issues effecting the world would be entirely non-existent (Pollution, extinction, global warming, to name a few).

The same goes for the world of Pokemon. Take the species of Grimer. It was born from gamma radiation to toxic sludge. Where did that sludge come from? Human facilities. Now, I'm not saying that Grimer is a bad Pokemon, but it's just an example. If you look at each game, there are subtle examples, and very apparent ones, of humans being the cause of pain for Pokemon and the environment at large. Team Rocket in R/B/G/Y/G/S/C alone caused hundreds of Pokemon pain by forcing them to be subjects to cruel experiments (The Radio Tower scandal in Mahogany).

Also, the manga (Pokemon Adventures/Special) clearly brings to light the suffering Pokemon endure under cruel Trainers and selfish humans. In fact, the entire Yellow arc of the series is centered around Lance's extremist views to eradicate humans as a result of watching the effects of pollution in Kanto.