5th Gen New Types?

Alexeon said:

With regards to Pokémon, I've always seen the Dark-type not as an evil/demonic power, but more of the darkness that can corrupt/cloud our minds. That plays heavily into why Psychic and Ghost-types are weak to Dark, and why Dark is immune to Psychic.

If Light is to be introduced as a new type, I don't think they will go the spiritual/holy route, since this comes very close to touching the concept of religion. Also, if Light does make it in, it would have to make sense with the various checks and balances, and not just have weaknesses/strengths just to cover other types.

Click to expand...

You cover it pretty well. The entire reason Dark, along with Steel, was brought in was to counter the highly imbalanced Psychic. Dark isn't an "evil" type: it's a corruption or cloudy type. Also, Light wouldn't be holy mostly because, like you said, it would be controversial if it went the holy route, and if it went by the more physical description of Light, most Pokemon that would be considered Light-type could be easily placed in Fire, Electric or Psychic.

There's nothing wrong with the set-up right now. While I wouldn't mind another Steel-type check, anything made to fix it would be very difficult to pull off, and Steel-type is already pretty good as is.

^Trust me they don't care as to why they added steel and dark types. Lots of us have tried explaining it. Lol =/

Alexeon beat me to the punch xD

You could say it would not throw the balance/stability off, however the type advantages and disadvantages (immunities as well) wouldn't make any sense.

Therefore that would throw off stability because then the system doesn't add up. Light and rock aren't even related...

Another day, another speculator kid doing his speculatin'. When will it ever end?

There's already enough types, and seeing as B&W are likely to have backwards compatibility (i.e. trading with D/P/P/HG/SS) it wouldn't be practical.

Alexeon said:

If you can explain why Light is weak against Psychic, Rock, and Light; why Steel has no effect on Light; why Flying is resistant to Light; and why all other Light-type match-ups are sensible as a reference to real-world concepts, then this would be fine. But the typing system the Pokémon franchise uses isn't just about balance, but also logic, and that can't be ignored.

Click to expand...

Yes, which is why martial arts masters cower at the sight of birds (Flying>Fighting), why Psychics can't bend metal spoons (Steel>Psychic), and why rocks magically squelch fires (Rock>Fire). :\

Anyway, before I start explaining the type matchups and their real-world equivalents, keep in mind that I am doing these from a Japanese world-view, which includes kami (beings with a spiritual essence), not from a Western world-view of angels and demons. (edit: and I feel justified in doing so since I am a Cultural Anthropologist who lives in Japan)

Light is not weak against Psychic, Rock, and Light; it's ineffective. There's a difference. We already have Psychic types that represent purity, so a holy type wouldn't really be too effective on them. Light being ineffective against Light is kind of ontological (it is because it is). Also, there are innumerable rocks that are seen as being kami in Japan, and many have shrines dedicated to them. So a holy/Light type would be ineffective against them.

Shrines in Japan are almost always surrounded by trees, bamboo, grass, etc. even if they're in the middle of a city. Heck, I even saw a shrine in the middle of a shopping mall that was open-air and had bamboo. It's like you can build with iron and concrete all around it, but it never touches the shrine. Hence, steel is ineffective.

Light is weak to Ghost/Poison because those are all corrupting influences. It is mutually effective against Dark because they are opposite sides of the coin. It is strong against fighting and resistant to fighting simply to balance out the fighting/dark/psychic triangle.

There's your explanations for why I chose those things. Believe me, I thought about it, trying to keep real-world equivalents while still making it a balanced type gameplay-wise. I understand the game and how it works.

As for ignoring people saying that Dark and Steel were only added to balance out the uber Psychic type, well, yes. I'm ignoring that. I think it's related to the discussion of new types, but I don't think that them having a specific reason for adding types in the past has any bearing on adding new types now. It's when game companies get stuck in development inertia (we're doing it because that's how we did it in the past) that they stagnate.

BleuVII said:

Light is not weak against Psychic, Rock, and Light; it's ineffective. There's a difference. We already have Psychic types that represent purity, so a holy type wouldn't really be too effective on them. Light being ineffective against Light is kind of ontological (it is because it is). Also, there are innumerable rocks that are seen as being kami in Japan, and many have shrines dedicated to them. So a holy/Light type would be ineffective against them.

Light is weak to Ghost/Poison because those are all corrupting influences. It is mutually effective against Dark because they are opposite sides of the coin. It is strong against fighting and resistant to fighting simply to balance out the fighting/dark/psychic triangle.

Click to expand...

Now it actually makes sense. On your last post you didn't really specify and clarify on what was effective and what wasn't. Your theory is interesting and logical however, as most people following this thread know, I still deem a new type unnecessary (nothing personal).

Even then, I doubt Gamefreak would dare ruin compatibility with Generation IV games; especially when Black & White are coming out on the exact same handheld system.

BleuVII said:

Yes, which is why martial arts masters cower at the sight of birds (Flying>Fighting), why Psychics can't bend metal spoons (Steel>Psychic), and why rocks magically squelch fires (Rock>Fire). :\

...

As for ignoring people saying that Dark and Steel were only added to balance out the uber Psychic type, well, yes. I'm ignoring that. I think it's related to the discussion of new types, but I don't think that them having a specific reason for adding types in the past has any bearing on adding new types now. It's when game companies get stuck in development inertia (we're doing it because that's how we did it in the past) that they stagnate.

Click to expand...

I am literally 100% behind everything you've said. Those that don't want this can only be metagamers who are afraid of change, despite the fact change A) would probably improve the current formula and B) doesn't really need an explanation, either in the real world or in the Pokemon world.

Further to what you said, how are dragons super-effective against dragons? In fact, how are dragons super-effective against anything? Dragons don't even exist! How is ground super-effective against steel? Earth would do absolutely nothing against metal.

If we're basing the type matchups on real-world physics and chemistry, then fire and rock would be super-effective against everything, and the game would suck.

I don't think they'll make new types. Maybe Light if it had the exact same resistances and weaknesses as dark and dark and it ar supereffective on one another.

I say they should make a crystal type. I dunno...they've been using a lot of gem names 4 their games, so Why not?

(scroll down to the blue paragraphs to avoid my opinions and get to actual points) xD

BleuVII said:

Yes, which is why martial arts masters cower at the sight of birds (Flying>Fighting), why Psychics can't bend metal spoons (Steel>Psychic), and why rocks magically squelch fires (Rock>Fire). :\

Click to expand...

The Flying-type has an aerial advantage that makes the concept of fighting one hand-to-hand less sensible.

Psychics can bend and dent metal spoons through telekinesis, but so can rocks and my very much Normal-type Bend-and-Twist attack. The true brunt of damage from Psychic-type moves is implied to be mental, and the heavily-armored Steel Pokémon cannot be so easily reached.

And rocks beating fire is very much possible...I'd hope that smothering flames would be common knowledge.

BleuVII said:

Anyway, before I start explaining the type matchups and their real-world equivalents, keep in mind that I am doing these from a Japanese world-view, which includes kami (beings with a spiritual essence), not from a Western world-view of angels and demons. (edit: and I feel justified in doing so since I am a Cultural Anthropologist who lives in Japan)

Click to expand...

That goes into cultural issues that Nintendo/Game Freak know well enough to avoid, seeing as this is an international franchise. They heavily take from various cultures, not just Japanese, in order to create their Pokémon, and therefore, they need to stay with a less centralized way of thought.

BleuVII said:

Light is not weak against Psychic, Rock, and Light; it's ineffective. There's a difference.

Click to expand...

Choice of words made that unclear, sorry about that one.

BleuVII said:

We already have Psychic types that represent purity, so a holy type wouldn't really be too effective on them.

Click to expand...

Psychic doesn't represent purity. It simply refers to the power garnered through mental prowess.

BleuVII said:

Also, there are innumerable rocks that are seen as being kami in Japan, and many have shrines dedicated to them. So a holy/Light type would be ineffective against them.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't that just be the same as designating a Rock/Light type? Not all rocks have shrines, so not all rocks would be resistant to spiritual forces.

BleuVII said:

Shrines in Japan are almost always surrounded by trees, bamboo, grass, etc. even if they're in the middle of a city. Heck, I even saw a shrine in the middle of a shopping mall that was open-air and had bamboo. It's like you can build with iron and concrete all around it, but it never touches the shrine. Hence, steel is ineffective.

Click to expand...

This seems like a heavy stretch...but at least I understand your train of thought now.

BleuVII said:

It is strong against fighting and resistant to fighting simply to balance out the fighting/dark/psychic triangle.

Click to expand...

Which is a problem, but I suppose if we're unable to agree upon the logic presented by other typing match-ups, this won't really change either.

-----

I have no doubts you put thought into what you came up with, but your views on what seems logical are heavily based on your background, rather than an understanding of more universal concepts. I'll agree that a lot of what Pokémon presents can be deemed a stretch as well, but at the very least, they don't stay bound to concepts only certain cultures/groups of people would agree upon. This further adds to why a holy/spiritual type of Light would less likely be the way they would go about this.

-----

Sammuthegreat said:

Further to what you said, how are dragons super-effective against dragons? In fact, how are dragons super-effective against anything? Dragons don't even exist! How is ground super-effective against steel? Earth would do absolutely nothing against metal.

If we're basing the type matchups on real-world physics and chemistry, then fire and rock would be super-effective against everything, and the game would suck.

Click to expand...

Dragons being mystical...beings...they go by different rules that people will just have to accept. The way I see it, dragons beating dragons wouldn't be unheard of, if dragons are seen as superior beings that could only rival each other.

Ground beating steel is seen from the concept of taking down the mightiest of defenses by taking the ground beneath them.

Sammuthegreat said:

Those that don't want this can only be metagamers who are afraid of change, despite the fact change A) would probably improve the current formula and B) doesn't really need an explanation, either in the real world or in the Pokemon world.

Click to expand...

Even as a metagamer, I welcome change, and do see a great need for change considering the way the current metagame plays out. All I'm arguing about is the logic behind a Light-type, especially as a holy/spiritual type in a game that has, for the most part, avoided going down the routes of religion/spirituality.

-----

Gah, I heavily debated posting this and my previous post, since I knew it'd only get me into a debate that wouldn't result in much of anything. That said, even if we can't all agree on what would work, or even what needs to work, we can at least say that Light is a definite possibility that just needs to be tweaked to satisfy all fronts. The final decision Game Freak goes with may likely shape a new future for not only the mechanics of the game, but also the tone of the Pokémon franchise as a whole. Of course, the compatibility with the current generation is the biggest hurdle that needs to be explored first...

Kingler5 said:

I say they should make a crystal type. I dunno...they've been using a lot of gem names 4 their games, so Why not?

Click to expand...

OMG!!! How cud U even suggest that?!!1!!one! It wud throw the whole game outta balance!

;)

That is an interesting one that I haven't heard before. What kind of properties would it have? I can see a lot of things related to prisms and geometry.

EJ. said:

Now it actually makes sense. On your last post you didn't really specify and clarify on what was effective and what wasn't. Your theory is interesting and logical however, as most people following this thread know, I still deem a new type unnecessary (nothing personal).

Even then, I doubt Gamefreak would dare ruin compatibility with Generation IV games; especially when Black & White are coming out on the exact same handheld system.

Click to expand...

Oh, I'm not taking it personally. You have consistently listened and consistently disagreed, and that's cool. It's better than those who still assume, after 7 pages, that I'm talking about photons when I say "Light Type". :tired:

And I'm not convinced on the Gen IV/ Gen V compatibility. It would be quite tricky to pull this off.

BleuVII said:

OMG!!! How cud U even suggest that?!!1!!one! It wud throw the whole game outta balance!

;)

That is an interesting one that I haven't heard before. What kind of properties would it have? I can see a lot of things related to prisms and geometry.



Oh, I'm not taking it personally. You have consistently listened and consistently disagreed, and that's cool. It's better than those who still assume, after 7 pages, that I'm talking about photons when I say "Light Type". :tired:

And I'm not convinced on the Gen IV/ Gen V compatibility. It would be quite tricky to pull this off.

Click to expand...

There's one thing I try to do and that's to not be ignorant haha. Although I gotta side with Alexeon; the shrine idea is a little farfetch'd <--pun intended. I'm a little concerned about the compability though =/

BleuVII said:

OMG!!! How cud U even suggest that?!!1!!one! It wud throw the whole game outta balance!

;)

Click to expand...

Nah ur rong letz throw in wood iron n oil types! :D

Ok, seriously though, my biggest worry about a new type is variety. Let's say "light" refers to the scientific idea: I can't think of anything that would be "light" type that wouldn't fit better into Fire or Electricity. If "light" refers to the more spiritual idea of it, honestly, most of them are perfectly at home in Psychic. There would be Cresselia, Espeon... I can't think of anything else that we have now that could even be suggested as Light-typed. Sure, there's always new Pokemon we can add, but what are we going to do, throw in a dozen variations of Sun warriors? Remember, there's also religious controversy, so we can't go too far down this path.

Alexeon, I'm all for not getting into heavy debates about trivial matters. I'm just trying to point out the ridiculous lengths people will go to in order to explain the current type match-ups, and then turn around and denounce other peoples' theoretical types because the thought didn't occur to them first. I once questioned someone on this board about why Fighting is supereffective against Dark, and they replied that the "noble" warrior defeats the evil "dark" pokemon. Um... that's stretching quite a bit too. So I feel like I can stretch a bit with my definitions. It's not like I'm willing my type into existence or anything. The best I can hope for is that a hacker reads this thread, thinks it's a good idea, and implements it into their hack.

Now, about the religious controversy thing. Yeah, I can see that point. That's why I chose the Japanese concept, rather than angels and demons. "Holy" beings are seen in a much more neutral light. It's really not too far-fetched for people from other regions either, as long as it's not called "Holy" (hence the word "Light"). However, don't forget that the Japanese word for "Dark" type literally means "evil." The word is Aku, and I'm copying and pasting this from a dictionary:

悪 あく
evil; wickedness; (P)
悪 わる
bad thing; bad person

So if they can get away with "evil" pokemon simply by rebranding them "dark," I see no reason that would stop them from "holy." Just my 2 cents.

Light type? meh...

I think, as others have said, they should add types that have not already been represented by others *coughcoughpsychicelectricfireandlightcoughcough*
Or, a "holy light" type would be a good adition, too.

An idea I had for a hack-rom was to add a Plasm type. It's cool.
Or maybe a Virtual type too?
As someone stated, Crystal sounds interesting =D

I'd rather not put any new types at all. It could possibly ruin strategies etc. or possibly ruin the whole gameplay.

and lets not try to mix up pokemon with logic. Gameplay beats logic people.

I'd laugh if light types DON'T end up being created and this was all for naught,

A light type comes with some ups and downs.
I read a post a page or 2 back suggesting Lanturn as a light type... Water Electric makes more sense.

And now up to date...
Light Type Machups IMO would be...
Super Effective: Dark, Bug, Ghost
Regular Damage: Normal, Fighting, Ice, Dragon, Flying, Fire, Water, Psychic, Poison
Not Very Effective: Grass, Steel, Light, Electric, Ground, Rock
No Effect: N/A

Having a Super Effective against Dark/Ghost would certainly rape it's way through anyone thinking that a hacked WonderGuard Spiritomb/Sableye is a good idea.

The downside to this terribly tragic idea for an addition to the Pokemon world would be this...
Unless the Light Type Pokemon data is already stored in the current Gen IV Games, one of 2 things would happen.
Either A:
You would NOT be able to trade to/from Gen V to Gen IV, because the date would not exist. (Much like the Time Machine From Pokemon G/S/C, you couldn't trade backwards Pokemon that did not exist in Gen I (Like trying to trade a Ho-Oh to Red version, Not-Going-To-Happen.)(Even if the Steel type data didn't exist in R/B/Y/G, you could still trade Magnemite/Magneton back and forth between Gen I and Gen II. This is because the data for Magnemite and Mageton ALREADY existed in Gen I, the Steel Type Byte was just replaced with a big fat NOTHING, and those 2 Pokemon reverted to pure electric types.

Scenario B is much more... dynamic I could say... or horrendous, if you look at it from MY point of View.
B would require anyone wishing to trade back/forth from Gen V with Gen IV, to get a Mystery Gift Patch from the Nintendo Wi-Fi Mystery Gift Service, that would patch the cart much like how R/S needed a patch to fix the time system that eventually glitches and stops working. (The problem with this is, that that fix one only a mere byte, installing data for over (Probably) 100 new Pokemon would be ABSURD, as well as all new attack data, ability data, New Possible Poke-Balls, location data, Pokedex Entries on ALL of them, New Graphics for ALL of them (As GameFreak has been known to have designers draw different poses for EVERY pokemon for every new game release. (Or Duo Release as Pokemon loves to do.))
They would need to patch new attack data, new trainer sprites (NOT OW's) and cries for each one.


Either that or.... D/P/Pt wont have connectivity, but HG/SS will, as those were finished DURING B/W's creation, if they decided on a Light Type, it would probably already be hackable in HG/SS, as well as graphics and Dex Data for EVERY SINGLE ONE of Gen V.
Doubt it, but if some AR Code maker decides to make a code for HG/SS that forces wild pokemon PAST Arceus, and it works, good on you, you just defeated the whole purpose of Nintendo's revealing of these Pokemon, and you will forever be known as the jerk who ruined Pokemon.
I'm done with my $3.50

loliwin said:

I'd rather not put any new types at all. It could possibly ruin strategies etc. or possibly ruin the whole gameplay.

and lets not try to mix up pokemon with logic. Gameplay beats logic people.

Click to expand...

Logic? You wanna talk about logistics, people here have Pokemon down to a science.
If you think logic isn't a part of Pokemon you've been posting in the WROOOONG forum.

Another issue though is the necessity of this. I'm worried about whether we could implement a new type due to variety of Pokemon and whatnot (especially something as narrow as Light-type), but there's also complexity. We're already at 17 types, and that's a lot. We might be able to add in another type, but there's no real reason to. In the least, I'm not arguing that Light would imbalance the game (although that is quite likely), but I am saying that this would add a whole lot of complexity that we don't need.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Most of this time we've been arguing whether it could be included or not, but we need to ask why it'd be included. There are no pressing needs to balance anything, nothing's dying for a re-type, and, at least in Light's case, there aren't enough ideas for Pokemon to justify a whole redesign of the element system.

Alexeon said:

Dragons being mystical...beings...they go by different rules that people will just have to accept. The way I see it, dragons beating dragons wouldn't be unheard of, if dragons are seen as superior beings that could only rival each other.

Ground beating steel is seen from the concept of taking down the mightiest of defenses by taking the ground beneath them.



Even as a metagamer, I welcome change, and do see a great need for change considering the way the current metagame plays out. All I'm arguing about is the logic behind a Light-type, especially as a holy/spiritual type in a game that has, for the most part, avoided going down the routes of religion/spirituality.

-----

]

Click to expand...

Fair enough Alexeon, at least you understand where we're coming from when we advocate the inclusion of a Light-type, and hey, what's the point in being on a messageboard if it's not to engage in some healthy debate.

But to clarify my own personal ideas about the potential Light-type, it's that it doesn't need to represent what is already represented by the Psychic type, and it doesn't need to skirt with controversy by representing holiness. Personally, I would want the Light type to be simply a counterpart to the Dark type. I know the Dark type was originally introduced to counter the Psychic type, but there are enough conceptual differences between Dark and Psychic that the two aren't, and never have been, true counterparts.

In the same way that Dark doesn't exactly represent "evil" or anything "unholy", the Light type doesn't need to represent "good" or "holiness." It could simply represent purity, honesty, and the associated presence of physical light (so yes, it does correlate to photons in part). The conceptual differences between this and Psychic are plain to see, in the same way that the differences between Rock and Ground aren't too difficult to conceive.

Maybe a good way to look at it is the way Jade Empire treated morality - the way of the open palm (Light) against the way of the closed fist (Dark). The open palm advocates thought, open-mindedness and avoids ideas like vengeance, whereas the closed fist is the idea that the end justifies the means. Neither is simply "good" or "evil"; all people in all walks of life employ both sides of that particular coin in their everyday lives.

Twilight Sky said:

You're combining Pokemon with logic there, y'know, something you should never do.

And thats what always, always happens during light-type debates. Most people who support it try to use logic to back up their reasoning but this is Pokemon, logic fails to back anyone up in any form and fashion whatsoever.

Click to expand...

I think you may have missed my point, which was essentially in agreement with you. I was trying to point out the absurdity in applying real-world logic to the Pokemon type matchups as they are now, and by association pointing out how pointless it was and is to require real-world explanations for why a possible Light type would be super-effective against certain types and ineffective against others.

Type matchups don't need to be real-world-logical. They are how they are, because it balances the game.

Twilight Sky said:

And you do have to take into consideration how this would affect the competitive metagame as well. Would it be completely altered or would it be balanced? You would have types that would be weak to light, and then you would have types that would be resistant to light in addition to having light attacks, and along with that you would have to have types that are immune to light, if any.

I think it's too much of a drastic change to make, and it's really not worth it, to be honest.

Click to expand...

This is what I meant when I said that those who opposed the introduction of new types must be metagamers who were afraid of losing their competitive advantage by being forced to learn some new type matchups. I for one am all in favour of shaking up the status quo; even though I am not a competitive battler myself, I can't imagine that some fresh blood could ever be a bad thing.

Furthermore (and finally, you'll be glad to know if you've ploughed through this wall of text), why does everyone assume that a new type would unbalance the game? Who's to say it wouldn't further balance it? Remember that more types doesn't equate to more imbalance - Generation I had 15 types, and was horribly unbalanced, whereas Generation II-onwards had 17, and was all the better for the extra two...

EDIT: Messed up the quote formatting...

...Maybe a Wood Type?

Or a Light Type, as supposed by the White version.

0m3GA ARS3NAL said:

Doubt it, but if some AR Code maker decides to make a code for HG/SS that forces wild pokemon PAST Arceus, and it works, good on you, you just defeated the whole purpose of Nintendo's revealing of these Pokemon, and you will forever be known as the jerk who ruined Pokemon.

Click to expand...

That code has already been created. And re-created. There exists no data beyond Arceus. HG/SS were programmed on the D/P/Pt engine, and show no attempt at being forwards-compatible.

Honestly, I doubt Gen IV and Gen V will have compatibility beyond a time-capsule or pal park type thing. The logistics of doing anything else are just crazy.