Were legendaries a good invention?

Started by moon April 14th, 2014 5:56 AM
  • 980 views
  • 15 replies

moon

they/them
Seen 11 Hours Ago
Posted 22 Hours Ago
37,443 posts
15.5 Years
If you think back to Gen I, we had Mew and Mewtwo and the elemental bird trio. The birds didn't have much of a plot or backstory to them in-game, they were just placed at different positions around Kanto for you to encounter and try to capture with a somewhat more difficult (higher leveled) battle than against other wild pokémon. Mew and Mewtwo weren't really "legendary"; Mew was considered extinct, a mirage pokémon and Mewtwo was an experiment gone wrong. Even the game mascots were the starters instead of some legendary duo/trio! The "legendary" part wasn't really invented yet and much less pronounced than in later generations. We has stuff like a memorable story about a Cubone and its ghost mother, a plot where TR tried to steal fossils to revive them into ancient pokémon and lots of myths and rumors about the various pokémon appearing in the wild or in possession of other trainers. Pokédex entries were interesting and you wondered if they were true but the limited game technology of the time couldn't really incorporate all interesting abilities and lore that were mentioned.

But wouldn't the pokémon franchise (overall) have been more colorful and interesting and led to people fancying even more odd pokémon as their favorites if we had seen the main plot arcs revolving around less "Legendary" kinds of species rather than pokémon specifically designed to be the superstrong mascot of the generation?

In later games, there is always a big, powerful legendary pokémon (or several) at the focus of the story. I'm thinking that sure, it's easy to form a game and plot around the movement and lore of some big cool special pokémon, but I would rather have seen more sideplots or even full game plots centered around more of the common pokémon. Like Cubone, or Munna and Musharna in BW. Legendary pokémon make for fun mascots and I guess they are powerful and good in high competetive battling tiers.

This is a thought I had. Maybe the franchise wouldn't have done as well without iconic legendary mascots, and maybe the plots of the games would have been more confusing without legendaries, but I just think it escalated somewhere (hrrm, gen 4 cough) and common (or less commonly noticed) pokémon should have been given more lore, love and at least sideplots.
paired with Ivysaur
Age 30
Male
Seen February 7th, 2017
Posted December 26th, 2016
585 posts
10.8 Years
On the topic of legendaries, I'd like to note that I appreciate them being in the game. They're usually cool, strong Pokemon that can be encountered only once (They're unique) which makes them even more interesting.

What I'd like to point out is that each of them could potentially be linked with a long, hard, interesting sidequest that ends with battling the Pokemon. But sadly, that is not usually the case. As you said, in gen 1, the legendary birds were just scattered around, with no backstory to them.

I would also like to mention some legendaries that are simply unnecessary. I'm talking about legendaries which are never mentioned in any game, can't be caught in any game, aren't useful in battle, don't have a "legendary" design, and are simply... there. I'd put Pokemon like Jirachi and Shaymin in this category. They just make it harder to complete the Pokedex, since they can only be obtained by events or by cheat devices. The games could do without them.

TL;DR: I love the idea of legendaries, but some of them have more potential, and others are unnecessary.

Pinkie-Dawn

Vampire Waifu

Age 30
Male
California
Seen February 16th, 2021
Posted May 16th, 2019
9,528 posts
10.5 Years
The idea of having legendaries is neat, but the problem is that a majority of them are banned in official and unofficial tournaments (only a handful allow them) and in-game battle facilities, thus destroying the main purpose of playing with your favorites, and it would be awful if that player's favorites were the major legendaries such as Mewtwo and Giratina. My only solution is to nerf the major legendaries on the movepool side - by making them shallower - to be on the same ranks as the minor legendaries, who aren't as OP as them. But that would require getting rid of TM moves in order for GF to do that.

Besides, there was a less focus on legendaries on XY's storyline, and yet people still complained about Xerneas and Yveltal not getting any major focus. So regardless if the plot focuses on legendaries or not, people will still get upset, and it's GF's job to make both sides happy before they start an internet riot to force them stop making the games themselves and let the fans make their own games.

Megan

She/Her, It/Its
Online now
Posted 10 Minutes Ago
17,736 posts
10.3 Years
In the first games the legendaries were more an achievement you got for exploring unknown areas. Most people would easily miss out of them simply because they didn't know they were there. For example many people didn't know of the Power Plant, but those who found it and got through were able to catch Zapdos. You can easily guess what was going on on schoolyard the next day.

In the newer Gens Legendaries tend to be more or less only for showing purposes (especially the cover Legendaries with their extremely high catch rate; might as well call it casualisation :P).

I'm not even talking about Event Legendaries, since I've heard they were the reason why the games actually were released outside of Japan, in the first place
Moderator of Previous Generations, Forum Games and VPP
You got a thing!

Khoshi

とてもかわいい!

Age 24
Male
Sydney, Australia
Seen January 3rd, 2020
Posted October 16th, 2019
2,646 posts
10.1 Years
Legendaries are like trophies you can show off to your friends, symbolising the blood, sweat and tears let out during the gruelling task of capturing them. At least, that's what it would be, if it weren't issuing commands and throwing a ball. :p. Particularly the Mystery Gift legendaries, they show you went the extra mile in getting a limited edition Pokemon. They also add a bit to the story, as it's usually built around the mascot legendary Pokemon. I think they're good because they're a way to bring jealousy out of friends (how evil am I) and a necessary component for stories in the Pokemon main series.

Eevee

╰( ´・ω・)つ━☆゚.* ・。゚

Age 28
Female
Canada
Seen July 7th, 2016
Posted July 4th, 2014
678 posts
9.6 Years
I think they were good in the past but now there's just..too many of them. In my opinion, there are too many of them so that kinda makes them lose their charm. They don't feel as special to me as they did before.

But now that I think about it, there's not really another effective way to have a mascot for the games. I can see why they created a legendary Pokemon for each game box to base the game's story around. But my concern is that if they'll pick a regular Pokemon and try to make it seem better than it is. Lucario anyone? I think that's more annoying. than more legendary Pokemon. xD


Seen January 1st, 2023
Posted March 23rd, 2022
3,316 posts
9.2 Years
I can't stand legendaries. I never use them and I never really care for any of them as they are so I just capture them to continue the story or if I can avoid it, I just run away lol. I guess I wouldn't mind so much if each game only had a handful or less of legendaries, but no...

I'd rather they take the time in creating a few more regular pokemon than churn out 13 or so legendaries and over half of them are poorly designed and almost pointless in story.

Eevee

╰( ´・ω・)つ━☆゚.* ・。゚

Age 28
Female
Canada
Seen July 7th, 2016
Posted July 4th, 2014
678 posts
9.6 Years
I can't stand legendaries. I never use them and I never really care for any of them as they are so I just capture them to continue the story or if I can avoid it, I just run away lol. I guess I wouldn't mind so much if each game only had a handful or less of legendaries, but no...

I'd rather they take the time in creating a few more regular pokemon than churn out 13 or so legendaries and over half of them are poorly designed and almost pointless in story.
This is why gen 5 bugged me in the legendary category. They went over the top with legendaries....and I'm not even counting the various forms!!

The main three legendaries were fine because they went along with the plot but Landorus and the other two, Genesect, Keldo, Meloetta, Virizion and the other two were just...way too much...


The Ruby Of The Sea

On Ice

Female
Cerulean Pool
Seen April 11th, 2016
Posted April 11th, 2016
93 posts
9.4 Years
I didn't mind legendary Pokémon until DPPT and BW/B2W2 every time you turned around there where legendary events. Too many in the game made it pretty lackluster to me. I did however love the Pseudo - legendary Pokémon that where around. I wish they would do a bit more for pokemon like that, and also ghost pokemon that frequent places
My pride and joy are my water type Pokémon

Boured

The Guildmaster

Age 23
Male
My Laptop
Seen March 12th, 2021
Posted April 19th, 2016
171 posts
9.6 Years
Yes they are a good invention because they test the trainers metal by making them almost impossible to catch whitch makes it more rewarding when you hear the little *click* from your Poké-ball and the shear joy of catching a hard to find Pokémon also you can brag to your friends lol
"What separates the wise man from the fool is whether or not they can learn from their mistakes" -Boured

Jagold is awesome!

Age 26
Male
Straya
Seen 4 Weeks Ago
Posted January 18th, 2022
1,244 posts
15.3 Years
I think the first legendary to actually have a somewhat backstory was Suicune in Crystal. Ho-oh and Lugia were avoidable I think, you got the Rainbow/Silver Wing and chose whether to go catch them I'm sure. I like the idea of Legendary Pokemon, gives Pokemon more of an adventure feel that you go on a journey and find rare Pokemon and stumble across a Legendary. I feel as though they really went over the top with unnecessary legends though especially from Gen IV onwards, i felt as though the 10 legends in R/S/E were enough then D/P/Pt came out with 14 and it seemed to just increase from there with forme changes and the like. They're a great idea just lost the "Legendary" appeal after a while

Brendino

The Ruins of Alph
Seen 3 Days Ago
Posted April 6th, 2023
8,567 posts
13.4 Years
I've honestly never minded if a legendary Pokemon (or duo/trio) are involved in the main part of a game's plot, since it gives us something to look forward to other than beating Gyms and knocking off the evil team. That said, if you're going to make Pokemon like that a main focus, they should be the only legendaries in the game, so that they actually live up to their name.

One good example of this would have been the 5th gen games. A lot of the story revolves around Team Plasma and Reshiram, Zekrom (and later) Kyurem. If they had been the only legendaries, that would've been great, but then you realize that there are 10 more of them waiting for you in Unova alone. At least Kalos dialed back this number a bit, with only 3 legendaries in-game, and seemingly 3 more event ones.
Seen February 26th, 2015
Posted February 8th, 2015
1,908 posts
10.3 Years
Legendaries are a concept that may have just allowed the survival of Pokémon all these years. The first games were good without them interfering in a major way. Back then, Pokémon was a fresh concept. In the second generation, they gave the main legendary a minor part in the storyline. Perhaps if they did not do this, the original fans would not like the newer games, saying it's just the same concept with some weird new Pokémon. Ever since Gen III, they made it a point to link the legendary with the evil team and doing something evil, and how we must stop them. Quite good if you ask me, there's actually a storyline, but with the freedom for you to do what you wish all the same.

Catching legendaries was not an idea I would appreciate. Sure, it's nice to battle an extremely strong wild Pokémon. Even nicer to catch it, considering that they're quite hard to catch. Gives you a flush of glory, doesn't it? You've not only foiled the evil guy's plans, you've also bagged an extremely strong Pokémon. You may/mayn't plan on using that, if not, you'll put the legendary in that reserved spot in the PC. Either way, the legendary's going to live the rest of its life (most probably eternal) inside a Pokéball, only to come out once in a while (if you choose to take said Pokémon along) and follow a trainer's orders. The trainer would possibly pass on the Pokémon's services to his/her descendant, no doubt. If he/she releases the Pokémon, then well and good. If not, I don't see why they should have let us catch the Pokémon. Making the legendaries uncatchable (and considerably stronger nonetheless) would surely be more realistic. At least more realistic that carrying space, time, sea and land inside the Pokéballs stashed in your pockets.
~

Pinkie-Dawn

Vampire Waifu

Age 30
Male
California
Seen February 16th, 2021
Posted May 16th, 2019
9,528 posts
10.5 Years
The concept of legendary Pokemon is great, but the abundance of them negates their 'value' imo. :<
Again, numbers does not determine their "value", it is by their backstory and power. I must also refer about how people were complaining about Gen VI having very little new legendaries to catch compared to previous gens.