Is it me or New pokemons are getting less creative??

[Clark]

No one said that all Pokemon have to be based on animals. If you learned to read you'd realize that we were stating that we simply prefer more animal-like designs. We're entitled to our own opinion, just like you. Not everyone has to like what you like. Don't pull out that Voltorb and Magnemite garbage, I never really liked them either, to be honest. In fact, Generation 1 Pokemon are too simple for my taste. However, older Pokemon are more animal-like, this is a fact. A lot of us don't like the new Pokemon, there's nothing more to it. Arguing with us and trying to say that Pokemon has always been this way is idiotic and simply a waste of both our time.

Eh, what's the point? It's inevitable that I'm going to get that idiotic reply about Mr. Mime or Voltorb, isn't it?

Why so aggressive? .w.

I'm not pulling that "Voltorb and Magnemite garbage" or trying to force my opinion on anybody. It just strikes me as odd that so many people lately seem to be saying things along the lines of, "aren't Pokemon supposed to resemble animals?" Especially considering we've had plenty of non-animal Pokemon since the beginning. The designs are becoming less organic, yes. My point is that doesn't necessarily mean the new designs are any more or less "creative"; it merely means they're different.

 

[Timbjerr]

Pokemon won't run out of ideas until they make a pokemon that shares the same typing, base stats, movepool and draws inspiration from the same popcultural/mythological reference.

So far, this hasn't occurred.

 

[Iceshadow3317]

All I got to say is if you do not like them. Don't get BW. Honestly Gen 5 have some of the better pokemon in it. And I have seen that theres a lot of girls that like the pokemon like the Ice Cream. I have also noticed that the cuter pokemon get more attention. I don't see how most look like digimon(some do) and NONE look like yugioh. But pokemon is pokemon.

 

[PiPVoda]

Why so aggressive? .w.

I'm not pulling that "Voltorb and Magnemite garbage" or trying to force my opinion on anybody. It just strikes me as odd that so many people lately seem to be saying things along the lines of, "aren't Pokemon supposed to resemble animals?" Especially considering we've had plenty of non-animal Pokemon since the beginning. The designs are becoming less organic, yes. My point is that doesn't necessarily mean the new designs are any more or less "creative"; it merely means they're different.

Pokemon stands for pocket monsters as we all may know. Now, if I'm right monsters don't have to resemble real life creatures at all. That is the beauty of this word. A monster can be anything, meaning so can a pokemon.

I fully agree with you btw. And I think designs are less 'organic' today considering the first designs, in my opinion, were based off of most animals we knew to attract gamers (especially the young ones). I mean, pokemon probably wouldn't have had as many followers back when it came out if the designs of today were used then. Some people could have thought it was for freaks, or dangerous for kids to play due to two monsters having airplane jets attached to them, resembling a drill, or some dangerous fire boar that looks like the devils' pet. xD

 

[Maruno]

My stance on the "animal vs thing" issue is that Pokémon should look reasonable, as if they really could exist and have developed to be like that. All the obvious real animal-based ones fit this description immediately, as real animals already exist, so we have no trouble assuming they could have developed in the Pokéworld too.

Then there are the odder cases. Ditto has a wholly uninspiring design, but for what it does (transform into anything else) it's a perfectly reasonable one. Some of the humanoid Pokémon look like cheap knock-offs of actual humans, but some of them do look like they could have developed naturally. This is entirely subjective, of course.

But then there are the gimmick Pokémon, and I don't mean it in the sense of "Farfetch'd is a gimmick" (Farfetch'd is a perfectly reasonable design that just so happens to carry around a leek, in the same way Kadabra carries around a spoon and Hypno a pendant, etc.). No, I'm talking about the Pokémon with frills and unnatural patterns and broccoli growing out of their heads and huge weird swirl things all over them (Infernape et al). Those frills look completely unnatural to me - how could they have come about? Groudon/Kyogre are covered in lines (Nazca or otherwise), which do nothing but shout that they're decoration and not natural. They'd be fine designs if it weren't for those lines, but because those lines are there it just makes it even more obvious that we're playing with creatures that were invented rather than ones that might actually have come about in nature. I'm not a creationist nut, so this puts me off.

In the latest generation we have Pokémon wearing judo outfits and Roman helmets and broccoli and wielding steel girders and being very obviously a candle or a rubbish bag - how did that happen in the natural world? We have Pokémon with swirls and squares and triangles drawn on them for the sake of filling in the empty parts of the sprites, and they're just not natural. I know every generation has had some Pokémon that simply look like they should never have existed (Voltorb/Magnemite, Unown, Nosepass/Lunatone/Solrock, Chingling/Bronzong, etc.), but there are simply so many of them in Gen 5 that one cannot just overlook it. I don't care what type of bat you have, it's not going to have a huge heart on it! Poké Ball designs do not belong on mushrooms. Gear is just... no. Ghost-types get a bit of leniency, as some believe they are actually possessions of objects, but I'm not in that boat - that's why lanterns and sarcophagi simply shouldn't be Pokémon.

Notice that I haven't really mentioned legendary Pokémon, which tend to be more frill-heavy than other Pokémon (particularly the mascot ones).

 

[Palkia]

This is just my opinion:

Gen I :Very basic, nothing really unique except for Mew and Mewtwo.

Gen II:Game Freak decided to make some more unique pokemon. They were great!

Gen III: Some weird pokemon that were pretty awesome. I don't dislike any pokemon form this generation.

Gen IV: Designs stated to get robotic (especially the legendaries.) and there were a few annoying pokemon.

Gen V: Despite intrducing my current least favorite pokemon, (even though it's typing is awesome.) it had some very creative pokemon.

 

[Gardenia101]

Oh, come on. This comes up EVERY generation- once you get used to them being Pokemon, they'll all seem normal. I mean, in the fourth generation people were complaining about an "Unoriginal Penguin, Turtle, and Monkey Digimon trio".

 

[Bluerang1]

Object Pokemon annoy me! Like the ice-cream and candle etc. So basically, inventors got the ideas from the Pokemon? Or the Pokemon came out of the objects? o_O

 

[Clark]

Look at your own post which drips of sarcasm. Sarcasm of that magnitude is what disrespectful people use generally. It doesn't give a tone of respect to the discussion being held but rather than an agressive statement without much tact behind it in your case.

I was using sarcasm in the first half of my post to make a point in a joking manner, not to aggressively attack anybody's opinion. Sarcasm isn't respectful, but that doesn't mean it's always aggressive. Y so srs?


I don't believe any Gen is any better or worse than any other; they all have their pros and cons. Gen1 isn't more or less original than Gen5. These threads keep popping up and people keep insisting the earlier gens' Pokemon were better / the newer gens' Pokemon are better. It really doesn't matter, and at any rate there's no use bickering about it. Besides, what Pokemon people like is a matter of personal preference. I myself adore Gen2, and find a lot of Gen4/5 Pokemon to be downright depressing. It's not that the designs are getting worse or less creative. It's just that the style is changing to be more appealing to a different target audience.

 

[sabrina_diamond]

I like SOME of the new designs (Pokabu for the win), but Minezumi looks hyper enough and they resemble plushies

 

[Masterge77]

I still think that the Pokemon are creative, half of the 5th Gen Pokemon are pretty good, the other half is utter crap (the garbage bag being the most literal example of "utter crap"), and then there are the clones, oh god, Emonga has to be the most unoriginal Pokemon to date, it's just Pachirisu with wings, nothing else, and it's as unoriginal as unoriginal can be, they could have given it a pre-evolution and evolution, but NO, they had to make it standalone just like Pachirisu, making it a worthless "novelty" Pokemon that just simply was made to take up space in your PC and not for anything else, if I had to take away two utterly terrible Pokemon (in creativity) from 5th Gen and replace them with a pre-evolution and evolution for Emonga, those two Pokemon would be Yoteri (because it looks too much like Growlithe) and Gigigear (it's just Gear with more gears)

outside of Emonga, we have Gear, which is..... let's just say that it could have been done a lot better, and given a better name than just "Gear", because it's two gears, not one, then we have Baniricchi and Banibaila (did I spell that right?), which are uncreative as sin, seriously, how do those things even stand with that super small tip on the bottom, let alone even WALK!? Then there is Baoppu, or should I say..... CHIMCHAR!!!!!! Seriously Nintendo, you already did a Fire Monkey the previous generation.....

Finally, we have the roaming trio, it's fairly obvious where THESE guys came from, especially with the previous games being remakes of the Johto games of all things, I will always prefer the Ecruteak beasts over these pathetic imatators.....

 

[Kirbychu]

These three seriously annoy me... It's just lazy... Not only are they awful designs, but they're literally the same sprite just recolored with a few minor details editted. This has been a problem since the fairy trio.

GF Employee #1: Anyone have any good ideas for Pokemon?

GF Employee #2: I know, let's make a genie Pokemon!

GF Employee #3: We've said it a million times, that would just look ridiculous.

GF Employee #2: It might fit in now, look at all the other Pokemon in this game!

GF Employee #1: He's right.. Get on it!

*Artwork is made, sprite is finished*

GF Employee #1: Okay, next on the list is the second legendary trio...

GF Employee #2: How about we make more genies!?

GF Employee #3: Do I have to make separate sprites?

GF Employee #1: Just go ahead and recolor the first one twice.

 

[ngik...]

many 5th gen pokemon are weird and ugly...
i think nintendo is out of ideas... for example, an ice cream pokemon?? nintendo is really out of ideas...

 

[AshPikastar]

Some of the Pokemon look alright to me but the others do look weird. Although Emonga is a clone of Pachirisu, it would have been great if they made it the second evolution form(Although I love Emonga) but some of them also look like Digimon as well.

 

[alisaie]

Object Pokemon annoy me! Like the ice-cream and candle etc. So basically, inventors got the ideas from the Pokemon? Or the Pokemon came out of the objects? o_O

Would this mean that you dislike Geodude (who is a rock), Voltorb (Pokeball?), and so on? It's not like object Pokemon have just now been introduced; they were all the way back in First Gen. I don't see why people are complaining so much about them. The Ice Cream one in particular. While us, who have been with Pokemon for the beginning, or at least one Generation or so, may think it's 'stupid' or 'unoriginal' must indeed think about the Generation of today (which has been mentioned before). Younger kids like Ice Cream, and since Pokemon's audience is guided towards those of a younger age, rather than saying 'it's unoriginal' they're simply going to say 'COOL AN ICE CREAM POKEMON' if Black/White is their first Pokemon Game.

I personally like the Ice Cream Pokemon. It's cute. Maybe it's because I'm on the same level as the little six and seven year olds in which are just going to start their first Pokemon Journey, or would it be because I realize just that? I won't deny that I don't like some of the Pokemons' designs, such as the bag of trash, but I'm sure there will be some kids who like the design, because it is a bag of trash, just like with the Ice Cream. It's Ice Cream. They're six and seven year old. They're gonna like the idea of an Ice Cream Pokemon.

Like several others have said 'it's because of the audience for today'. Pokemon isn't guided for us "nostalgia freaks" (and if it was, they would have quit, because we're just so damn picky, aren't we). It's the kids. I won't deny that I don't like some of the Pokemon myself, like the Genies, but let's look at it another way: a small little six year old may go 'OH HEY GENIES. :D' because have the other trios existed for him? Nope. The same goes for the Alien, the Megaman Looking one, the Robot, and so on.

( And just on a side note: Hitomoshi is my personal favorite. Yes, the one that was called 'the Candle'. )

 

[Apostrophe]

many 5th gen pokemon are weird and ugly...
i think nintendo is out of ideas... for example, an ice cream pokemon?? nintendo is really out of ideas...

Nintendo doesn't make Pokemon. Besides, what's wrong with Ice Cream pokemon? Gives me fond memories of this:

 

[BlueShadow V 2.0]

These three seriously annoy me... It's just lazy... Not only are they awful designs, but they're literally the same sprite just recolored with a few minor details editted. This has been a problem since the fairy trio.

GF Employee #1: Anyone have any good ideas for Pokemon?

GF Employee #2: I know, let's make a genie Pokemon!

GF Employee #3: We've said it a million times, that would just look ridiculous.

GF Employee #2: It might fit in now, look at all the other Pokemon in this game!

GF Employee #1: He's right.. Get on it!

*Artwork is made, sprite is finished*

GF Employee #1: Okay, next on the list is the second legendary trio...

GF Employee #2: How about we make more genies!

GF Employee #3: Do I have to make separate sprites?

GF Employee #1: Just go ahead and recolor the first one twice.

Hilarious. I totally laugh when I read this lol!!! Those are the worst legendary ever!

 

[GaXeL]

ya, the ice cream ones, sarcophagus, chandelier and junk monster made me lol

 

[ManhattanTheStarr]

Lulz, I know I already posted here, but I just have one last thing to say...x3
Y'know, in the beginning, Pokemon were extremely UNcreative.
Look at some of these 1st generation Pokemon!

Look at it! It's a pile of goo! And it's name is Muk. Just "muck" without the c. Yeah, that's really creative.

Nothing really uncreative about the design, but the name... Mr. Mime.
All they did was add Mr. to mime! That's not so creative either. T_T

Oh, C'MON. It's just a Pokeball with eyes!

Seeeee? Look at the old "original" Pokemon. They weren't creative at all!
Geodude was just a rock with arms, and Squirtle looked like a regular turtle with a curly tail. xD Pokemon are becoming MORE creative now.

They're almost always some type of reasoning for their design, and they're usually based off of Japanese folklores n' shizz. Of course, some 5th generation Pokemon are kinda uncreative. Like the trash bag...ice cream cones...the Pokeball mushroom...
But most of the more uncreative Pokemon are just remakes of older ones. :3

 

[Maruno]

But most of the more uncreative Pokemon are just remakes of older ones. :3

That's another factor here. One or two remakes in a Gen are fine enough (i.e. there's always a local Rattata/Pidgey/Caterpie), but Gen 5 has tons of them! Glameow, Chimchar (three versions of), Zubat, Diglett, Chansey, Jumpluff, Roselia/Bellossom, Cacnea, Muk, Lucario, Jynx, Farfetch'd, Stantler, Pachirisu, Luvdisc, Magnemite and Tauros all have Gen 5 counterparts, and that's a lot. Some of them are replacements (i.e. using the same concept), while others look like they could be related.

We can only hope that at least some of these will eventually be found to be related to the old versions (i.e. via evolution/breeding, not just because the Pokédex says so). Then they would be more acceptable.