• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • It's time to vote for your favorite Pokémon Battle Revolution protagonist in our new weekly protagonist poll! Click here to cast your vote and let us know which PBR protagonist you like most.
  • 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.
    Register

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

What do I think? Honestly, I thought the Generation V Pokémon looked odd when they first saw the light of day, especially if I delve into comparing their designs to the previous generations. I'm guessing that those sentiments sum up the feelings of the original poster, that some of the new Pokémon don't look like Pokémon from the first four generations.

Fans originally had a specific number of Pokémon among the myriad creatures that are surely present in the in-game universe. That's the problem: our opinion of how Pokémon should look like is shaped by the first [relatively] few Pokémon that we encountered for the past four generations. I can't deny how some of the new Pokémon look different design-wise. Yet I agree with most of the people who responded to this thread; Pokémon don't have to look a certain way, they just have to be identified as Pokémon by the creators.

"So what are Pokémon supposed to look like?"
To take the thread's question as it is, I'll respond with that generic rhetorical question. But if I were asked by what I assume (but I don't really know) the original poster's intentions were, then I'd say that some of the new Pokémon don't look like they came from the first four generations.
 
There are some seriously stupid looking Pokemon, and it just seems obvious that they're running out of ideas.
Click to expand...
So Magnemite's evoltuon being...three Magnemite, and this concept repeated with Diglett wasn't 'running out of ideas' too?
You've all seen this image, right? That is the difference between older and newer generations. Newer monsters have more 'pointless' features; spikes, stripes, fluffy bits, etc. What's good or bad is a matter of opinion, but there is generally a clear distinction between early and recent generations.
Click to expand...
Part of that may have been due also to the improved capabilities of the systems; the first few games were limited even in the number of colours Pokemon had in their sprites. As that evolved no wonder things got more fancy, and I'd assume that art styles of Sugimori and co changed as well over the about decade-and-half Pokemon has been around for.
 
There is no way a Pokémon should look.. we all know that. So all Pokémon look like Pokémon because they are Pokémon.

Simple as that.
 
Well, I dont like that some legendaries doesnt even look like pokemon creatures. I mean take a look at Meloetta for example.
 
I suppose with first gen, they could create anything. When creating the new gen pokemon, they had to try and not make them too similar to the old ones. That's why they seem so different and strange. That's what makes it so interesting. :)
 
I agree with Beee. I mean, why do people say they don't look original? Does Voltorb or Electrode look original? What about Diglet? THAT seriously looks like a 3 year old drew it more than Druddigon.
Each generation has it's failures and successes, but all I can see is a success, in my opinion. Finally they strayed away from making new evolutions for old Pokemon, Baby Pokemon for ones that shouldn't even have one, and finally no more weak Caterpie/Weedle idea (yes, there is Venipede and Sewaddle, but at least their evolutions are somewhat useful).
I like this generation, a lot. And if people are saying that the new ones look more like Digimon, and that they should just buy a Digimon game, why haven't they? Why are they still playing Pokemon Black/White?
 
All Unova Pokemon look like Pokemon and I love most of them. To me, Hoenn Pokemon look less like Pokemon: Many of them are ugly, weird or just sickening. But there are some good species: Wingull, Spheal, Lotad, Seedot, Ralts, Swablu, Numel and Aron families are all lovely.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a big fan of Black and White pokemon. I've gotten used to it but I think my main problem was how most of them were just replacements woobat? Why not zubat? Roggenrola? Why not Geodude? and so on. I missed how it completly departed from the older pokemon. yeah I thought Icecream and rubbish bags were odd at first but I've began to accept them (I never had an issue with the gears though). There are 'freak' pokemon in every gen really not just B+W, in fact, I prefer the trubbish to Mr. Mime right now.
To me pokemon resemble animals in my eyes rather then people or objects but really there's no law about it, it's rather what we're used to.
 
OrdealByFire said:
I agree with the OP...

There are some seriously stupid looking Pokemon, and it just seems obvious that they're running out of ideas. I can't imagine what they'll look like if Pokemon is still around in another 10 years.

I know there's not general consensus as to what a Pokemon should look like, but come on... Vanillite and its evolved forms really come to mind as ones that just make me shake my head.

And it's like the Pokemon people were like, "Alright... this Pokemon looks goofy as hell, so we HAVE to make it pretty powerful to make up for it."

I'm not sure what I'm saying. It's late.

But I will say the first generation of Pokemon will always be my favorite ... most likely because of the nostalgia factor. Ah... bias.
Click to expand...
There's stupid looking Pokemon in Gen 1 like Exeegcute the egg Pokemon that evolves into a Coconut, how does make that sense?, at least vanilite still evolves into an ice cream cone.
This is what happen if the generations were reversed (language warning):
Spoiler:

IMO I like all the generations and my favorites are gen3 and 5.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A Pokemon looks like anything that Gamefreak put its credit on.

Anything other than that is possibly a Digimon. Or Hello Kitty.


As an Admin of a Pokemon RP that supports Fakemon, this question sends me into the deepest of primal rages. As its been stated there IS NO set design on what a Pokemon is or isn't. If its from Gamefreak, its a Pokemon no matter WHAT any fan says. So roughly, everything you think that DOESN'T look like a Pokemon....Looks like a Pokemon.

As for a few complaints:

Trubbish: Grimer is living sludge and Koffing is a floating ball of explosive gas. Both are basically designed on Pollution. Trubbish adds to this.

Klink: Magnemite, Porygon, Bronzor, all artificial life forms made form objects or even from nothing.

Vanilite: Cherubi is a Cherry. There was living food before Gen 5 XD


The games themselves are maturing, its normal for the creatures to reflect this in design. They aren't all going to be the pudgy, doe eye'd fluffballs we know and love.
 
I have to admit, as I was playing through, I couldn't help but notice how much like real animals/objects Pokemon are starting to look like. However, I have no real negavtive comments on this. Even though I did love the purely creative Pokemon in past generations, I have to admit, the only two pokemon I found annoying in Black/White were Trubbish, and Ducklett. And even then, that was just because they're so.... obvious. In past years, they at least kind of veiled WHAT exactly inspired the Pokemon. But then again, I suppose after a while you run out of things to make into Pokemon. =/ *CoughCough* And FWI Ducklett, we already have Psyduck =P *CoughCough*
 
While I personally prefer Gen I and think some of the some new Pokémon look retarded,I pretty much agree with the whole "Pokemon can look like whatever the hell they want and still be Pokemon" argument.
 
Being rude and right is good... of course, Pokes like Pawniard/Bisharp and Durant look like Yu-Gi-Oh. However they did make the legends better then D/P/Pt, they looked scary comparing it to a Pikachu. I'm sure they'll use the anime to show off it's cute side. I don't about Durant though, nothing comes to mind when getting him cute. FOREVER UGLY!
 
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.
 
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 then Yamask is super weird. Its pokedex entry:
Each of them carries a mask that used to be its face when it was human. Sometimes they look at it and cry.
These Pokémon arose from the spirits of people interred in graves in past ages. Each retains memories of its former life.

So, this pokemon used to be a person? HUH? since when are people reincarnated as pokemon? I suppose it would make sense, as Pokemon seem to be the equivalent of animals. But still. That's weird.
 
It's kind of hard to explain, but they didn't seem like Pokémon anymore. I mean, some of them did, like the starters or the legendaries and some other ones, but other than that they seemed like they were going off into some other thing that isn't Pokémon, if you know what I mean.
 
In 1996 Pokemon Red was released and the franchise was RUINED FOREVER! The idea of Pokemon was so much better before it was published. Really, it was more fun to think about poket monsters than to play a GameBoy. (FYI Sarcasm)

Just Like Other 20 year old game franchises, each game IS better than the one before. Wheather you like it or not.

Consider the Following: The target audience of Pokemon is 10 years old. And you favorite generation of pokemon was from when you were 10. See any correlation?

Pokemon is still awesome! You just arn't young enough to get it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top