5th Gen Game Freak needs to make Fire types!

[OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire]

We should have a fire rhino we have no rhino other than the Rhyhorn family so we could use a new one and it should be fire. We should also have a fire gorilla that is Fire/dark or fire/ground actually fits better. We could also use a fire/grass, we already have Water/grass so why not a plant that blooms when covered in magma... they really exist!

 

[jon328]

i hated diamond and pearl for that reason exactly! NO FIRE TYPES at least i picked chimchar so i had a fire type, but if i picked the other two then i would only be able to catch ponyta... and i do NOT like ponyta >.>

 

[Nick Man]

Actually it's 33 divided by 493 which is 0.0669 or 6.69%. So for every 100, like you said, there is 6 fire types.

More importantly, I agree. Their should be more fire types or pokemon with strange type combinations and unique designs.

 

[Ho-Oh]

Yes, cause fire type is the best type. Pure cute fire types would be nice.

 

[Thunderpunch]

Some types are rare, some types are not. Dragon, Ghost, and Ice happen to be rarer along with Fire, and things like Water and Grass are more common. Pokémon just plays out that way. n_n

I agree, I like rare things in general, and there shouldn't be a ton of something special like dragon or fire.

 

[Archer]

In the first generation they added a total of 12 fire types out of 151 pokemon.
In the second generation they added a total of 10 fire types out of 100 new pokemon.
In the third generation they added a total of 6 fire types out of 135 new pokemon.
In the fourth generation they added a total of 5 fire types out of 107 new pokemon.

If you total those numbers you get 493 total pokemon with 33 total fire pokemon. That is a sad number. If you divide 493 by 33 you get a little under 15.

This means that so far the percentage for adding in a fire pokemon is a sad 15%. This means that for every 100 pokemon, there will be 6 fire pokemon. This is not a sure fact, since its only a rough estimated average but it is sad nonetheless.

Do you think Nintendo/Game Freak needs to change this!?

Um, if you want the percentage, it's (33/493)*100 = 6.7%

I think the issue here is that fire should be a common type, as it's a starter type. The OP is also right about the decline:

Gen I Percentage: 8%
Gen II Percentage: 10%
Gen III Percentage: 4.4%
Gen IV Percentage: 4.7%

Final Percentage: 6.7%

That said, I've just realised, that if each of the 17 types were to have an even amount, there would be (1/17)*100 = 5.9% dedicated to each. Sound like Fire types are so neglected now? I agree that they should be a more common type, though. Go, numbers. Play.

 

[Thunderpunch]

Um, if you want the percentage, it's (33/493)*100 = 6.7%

I think the issue here is that fire should be a common type, as it's a starter type. The OP is also right about the decline:

Gen I Percentage: 8%
Gen II Percentage: 10%
Gen III Percentage: 4.4%
Gen IV Percentage: 4.7%

Final Percentage: 6.7%

That said, I've just realised, that if each of the 17 types were to have an even amount, there would be (1/17)*100 = 5.9% dedicated to each. Sound like Fire types are so neglected now? I agree that they should be a more common type, though. Go, numbers. Play.

Your math is right, but you should also remember that a high percentage, maybe over 50%, of pokemon have two types and not one. If 50% of pokemon are dual-typed, that would make each type (on average) 50% more prevalent than you suggested, in fact 8.85% instead of 5.9%, so that a 6.7% fire percentage would, in fact, be below average.

 

[An-chan]

Now let's see. My favourite types are Electric, Ghost, and Ice. There are 28 Electric-types, 22 Ice-types, and a whopping 18 Ghost-types altogether. There are 25 Dark-types, 19 Dragon-types, 37 Rock-types, 26 Steel-types... Nope, Fire isn't even close to being as neglected as you make it out to be. Granted, Water-types (92), Grass-types (55), and Flying-types (65) are pretty abundant, but that's just mirroring the real-life situation. However, when you can name at least six types out of 17 that have less Pokémon than Fire, and a few that have about as much, then Fire-type isn't really all that neglected... It's average. Which is pretty natural for a powerful type like Fire.

Not that I oppose to adding new Fire-types. I just wanted to pop by to mention that no, it's not very neglected at all.

 

[vibratingcat]

they better put in more fire type. and not just some bulky fire type. i want a fast one! if they put a rly awesome fire type pokemon thats catchable b4 the elite 4, than i will choose tsutaaja instead of pokabu.

 

[dead-man-walking]

Now let's see. My favourite types are Electric, Ghost, and Ice. There are 28 Electric-types, 22 Ice-types, and a whopping 18 Ghost-types altogether. There are 25 Dark-types, 19 Dragon-types, 37 Rock-types, 26 Steel-types... Nope, Fire isn't even close to being as neglected as you make it out to be. Granted, Water-types (92), Grass-types (55), and Flying-types (65) are pretty abundant, but that's just mirroring the real-life situation. However, when you can name at least six types out of 17 that have less Pokémon than Fire, and a few that have about as much, then Fire-type isn't really all that neglected... It's average. Which is pretty natural for a powerful type like Fire.

Not that I oppose to adding new Fire-types. I just wanted to pop by to mention that no, it's not very neglected at all.

You forgot that four Fire-Types are Legendary. Also, Ghost, despite having less number than Fire, are easier to spot. The rarity of Fire and Ice Pokemon is because of their rare-to-see possibility.

 

[loliwin]

It'd be nice to put some more fire pokemon, just not too much or well see about 100 fire pogeymanz! XD

 

[kaiser32]

I'm all for this, because it's a true pain in the neck when you have to manage with the crappy fire types early on. It forces you into a wall (Use fire starter) I don't like it to be honest.

 

[Kai Yamato]

Agreed. Also alot less ussless bug grass normal and flying.

And less water types. I swear if I see another useless fish, I'm gonna kill it with an electric type. >(

 

[A Pixy]

And less water types. I swear if I see another useless fish, I'm gonna kill it with an electric type. >(

Yes, none of us ever want to see another Tentacool as long as we live.

Now let's see. My favourite types are Electric, Ghost, and Ice. There are 28 Electric-types, 22 Ice-types, and a whopping 18 Ghost-types altogether. There are 25 Dark-types, 19 Dragon-types, 37 Rock-types, 26 Steel-types... Nope, Fire isn't even close to being as neglected as you make it out to be. Granted, Water-types (92), Grass-types (55), and Flying-types (65) are pretty abundant, but that's just mirroring the real-life situation. However, when you can name at least six types out of 17 that have less Pokémon than Fire, and a few that have about as much, then Fire-type isn't really all that neglected... It's average. Which is pretty natural for a powerful type like Fire.

Not that I oppose to adding new Fire-types. I just wanted to pop by to mention that no, it's not very neglected at all.

You have a good point. Maybe there should just be more types of those Pokemon in general. Not just Fire, but Steel and Ghost and all the ones you just pointed out.

 

[Guy]

And less water types. I swear if I see another useless fish, I'm gonna kill it with an electric type. >(

Yes, please. ;_;

A lot of the Water type Pokémon we have now are quite good. I can't say anything bad about them to a large degree. However, there is just too many of them, and they've become a lot more common in water and outside of water. :\ I think this generation should spend a little less time focusing on this type, and build up on others.

Such types I'd like to see an increase in other than Fire, would be Dark (which seems likely considering the game titles), Steel, Ghost, Ice, and Ground.

The number of Fire types itself maybe be larger than other types as mentioned by dead-man-walking, however they are less common to encounter. That said, most of those numbers fit into an evolutionary sequence. Already 9 of those counted are from starters alone. So, I'd still like to see some more Fire types along with the other various types who seem to be a bit neglected.

 

[myrrh25]

This means that so far the percentage for adding in a fire pokemon is a sad 15%. This means that for every 100 pokemon, there will be 6 fire pokemon.

Maths fail. 15% of 100 pokemon is 15, not 6.

 

[Garland]

FIRE RACISM! LYNCH GAME FREAK!!!!

 

[Dawn]

I'd like to see more fire types. x3 Even though I've never chosen the fire starter since Gen 1 and 2.

 

[Crysta Blade]

As much as I like Water types, I'd want to see more Fire types. On top of that, we could also use more Electric types.

 

[ilikeluigi]

I think there are too much fire types. I want more Dark, Ghost, and Dragon types.