• 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!
  • Our weekly protagonist poll is now up! Vote for your favorite Trading Card Game 2 protagonist in the poll by clicking here.
  • 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 New Types?

Status
Not open for further replies.
light/dark theory... adds up!

I remember when i used to trade pokemon cards like crazy, holos, ex, and other kinds which i dont even remember...
but I do remember two special classes of cards, light and dark pokemon

I had a light Arcanine card, and though beat up i knew it was rare. So I think that instead of a new element in the game, there will be a whole new thing to keep track of: a pokemon's phase, similar to the idea of shadow pokemon in Colosseum and XD.

Think; special bosses with light/dark phase pokemon, giving extra stats and a sort of pre-battle animation like for shinies... breeding with a special light/dark pokemon, giving a chance to have any pokemon light/dark... this would be a incredible thing to add! imagine trying to get every pokemon in the pokedex light and dark form :knockedou
 
Last edited:
sorry for double post, adding pictures of what i mean...
 
I have always wanted only one more type, and no more than that.
That type is the Light type.

But the problem is that a lot of Fire, Steel, and Psychic type Pokemon and attacks are already more suited to be the Light type, and introducing the Light type would mess up most of those things. Too bad.

An example of a Pokemon that would have the light type is Ho-oh, but the problem is that it would have three types that way, so it's a bad idea. Otherwise, it would be great.
An example of a move that begs to be of the light type is Flash Cannon. It's a burst of light.
 
I just sat here and read through the entire Light-type debate...because I was bored.

I've been fairly neutral to it for the past ten years, leaning towards the "if it ain't broke, don't' fix it" argument, but BleuVII is perhaps the first person I've seen support the light-type through its implications as a holy or spiritual type as a counterpart to the evil and sneaky dark-type. While I made this connection years ago, most people nowadays just associate light with...light...like a lightbulb light...a boring and rather limited concept indeed. >_>

While I like the idea of light-type as representative of holy energy...occupied by angels, fairies, and miscellaneous heavenly beings, and I'd love to see poison have better type-coverage, I still lean towards the issue of balance. The type chart is perfectly fine as is. Steel and Dragon are moderately dominant in OU, but the common presence of Earthquake, Flamethrower, and Ice Beam keep them in check.

Like I said, I'm not completely opposed to it, but GameFreak has to be rather meticulous when it comes to the game's balance before just throwing in the light-type due to fan demand and risk mucking up the relative stability of our metagame. This may involve adding another type in alongside light.
 
Light type...hmm, well I wouldn't mind there being one but it really wouldn't make much sense to me. We already have fire and electric so what would light's purpose be? Use of some energy from within or when light is out to control the sky? As in determine where light reaches thus being the difference between life and death? If this were the case, then it would make for a fine storyline in black & white.
 
There is actually a 6-page long discussion of this already. My suggestion over there was that rather than having "Light" mean physical light, make it more along the lines of "Holy." In Japanese, Dark is "Aku" which means evil. In the same way, make it "Sei" (holy) and translate it to "Light" in English.
 
I really liked Timbjerr's outlook. I think that was a good way to argue it and for the most part I agree.

And BleuVII you make a good point as well. But if they were to write it as "Holy" that would cause controversy. Several sprites were banned in GSC due to the fact they had religous references, which Nintendo does NOT like.
 
I think a Light type would be pushing it >.< Like really how many of them can you make? Proble not many
 
BleuVII said:
The great thing about Pokemon's system is that it can handle additions without becoming unstable or imbalanced. Someone brought up Sableye and Spiritomb. That is a great point. To have a type combination that leaves one with zero weaknesses shows that the system, while stable and established, is not perfect. A new type would definitely help that.
Click to expand...
It's not perfectly adaptive, no. (if it was we wouldn't be banning pokemon, anyway)

Or, if you're just talking about types, what proof from our games backs up your point there, BleuVII? They've never added types to this current system. Even then, there can be additions that overpower the system, we could get yet another type with beautiful pokemon that simply can't be overcome often enough. Although it might not be likely with over 600 pokemon, you never know, the checks to possible new pokemon of new types might already be banned or simply not viable. (see: MUHAHAHA, I have Lightadon, 600 BST and full of special attack, it's only counter? ... Mantine.) Well folks, that's just game over right there if that's the case.

It's really about how conscious enough gamefreak is to make sure it's balanced, and with so many factors involved, that's no easy task. So no, there can certainly be additions that throw off the system, but it really all depends. I mean sometimes (regarding pokemon), we have to take things into our own hands and remove them from competitive play.

Also, as it was so eloquently put earlier, sableye and spiritomb aren't really good points of imperfection/need for a new type because whenever something has those kinds of positives, they're shut down in another aspect or two, such as terrible stats or weak movepool as our current two show. We don't need the introduction of a new type because we have bad non-super-effective-weak pokemon running around. Just because something can't take super-effective hits doesn't mean it's invincible. (otherwise Sableye, a very, very infrequent addition to competitive teams, would be everywhere.) Nor does it really appear as a flaw thanks to all the other circumstances. And say Nintendo produced something else with that type combination, and extremely powerful with little to no flaws, well, let's just say it'd probably go up for a ban to uber anyway. As we all know, they introduced types due to the game-breaking Alakazam and psychic-types, Sableye and Spiritomb are far from game-breaking thanks to their typing.

By the way, you all keep going on and on about Yin Yang, well, who was the opposite to Darkrai, the only dark-type legendary? Cresselia. So the opposite to another, possible game mascot, dark-type could certainly be psychic-type yet again. Who knows.
 
I've been going back and forth about whether or not to even bother responding to you, BeachBoy; you're all over the map. Asking for proof of a situation working and then saying it has never happened before; talking about how certain pokemon have been banned from competitive play and then turning around and praising Game Freak's meticulousness. My favorite comment is this:

BeachBoy said:
the checks to possible new pokemon of new types might already be banned or simply not viable. (see: MUHAHAHA, I have Lightadon, 600 BST and full of special attack, it's only counter? ... Mantine.) Well folks, that's just game over right there if that's the case.
Click to expand...


You're killing me. That says nothing about adding a new type; that's just an example of bad game design, and we all trust Game Freak to be better than that.

You asked for my proof of why a new type would work. Here it is:

[PokeCommunity.com] New Types?


It's a chart. The beauty of it is that you can add another row and another column and not change the rows and columns that came before it. All that you have to do is make sure that the new row/column has the same average number of characteristics as the one that came before it. It's really not that hard. And another column is not game breaking.

I bring up Sableye and Spiritomb not because they are great pokemon, but because there exists a dual-type combination that has no weaknesses. That right there, in my opinion, warrants the creation of a new type so that there is at least one weakness.

My proposed Light type was strong against Fighting, Steel, and later, Dark; weak against Psychic, Rock, and Light; Immune to Steel; weak to Ghost, Poison, and Dark; and resistant to Flying and Light. In my opinion, that seems like it not only balances itself, but also does two needed things: makes Poison more useful and gives Steel another weakness.

Now, I can understand if you don't want the addition of a Light type, but it's simply not a good argument to say that it would throw the game out of balance or break it to add another type. It wouldn't. As long as the type has strengths and weaknesses and can't combine with another type in order to have no weakness, it won't break the game.
 
Look in my oppinion the other types have light covered in fact theres one move that specifically refers to light i.e. flash cannon
(Duh)
So I agree with the many people who have said this already LIGHT TYPES ARE A BAD IDEA SO GET OVER IT.

seriously
 
The Psychic type seems to fill the niche of Light in Pokémon already. Espeon/Umbreon and Cresselia/Darkrai have already been mentioned, but I'd like to throw in Mew, Celebi, Jirachi, the Gardevoir line and the Chimecho line. These Pokémon would be shoo-ins for the Light type if it existed, but Game Freak chose to give them the Psychic type instead. This, in my opinion, proves Game Freak's stance on this issue.
 
See, one of the problems with the Light type is Pokemon that would fit in it. Ones that already exist, I mean.

I highly doubt they'll change the typing of those guys any time soon. If they did, some Pokemon do raise the question - what type to replace?
 
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.

BleuVII said:
My proposed Light type was strong against Fighting, Steel, and later, Dark; weak against Psychic, Rock, and Light; Immune to Steel; weak to Ghost, Poison, and Dark; and resistant to Flying and Light. In my opinion, that seems like it not only balances itself, but also does two needed things: makes Poison more useful and gives Steel another weakness.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top