- 786
- Posts
- 16
- Years
- Seen Oct 22, 2016
Too many evolutions spoil the broth
It has become a certainty that with each new generation there will be new evolutions as well as a few pre-evolutions of Pokémon from previous generations. Fans typically look forward to finding out which Pokémon will have such a treatment, and there usually is at least one topic on forums that ask users to speculate or "request" new evolutions.
This was probably the thing most looked forward to in the time before Gold and Silver's release, with many eagerly awaiting the long-rumoured Pokégods. While they never arrived exactly as thought, new evolutions did and people were still amazed. Pre-evolutions were actually a surprise, having never been rumoured, so they were also a much-welcomed addition.
This all changed with the release of the fourth generation of Diamond and Pearl, and instantly led to the claim that Game Freak had finally "run out of ideas" and that previous Pokémon were "ruined". Despite completely turning around previous distaste for the third generation, many people still harbor a resentment over the new evolutions.
So has Game Freak really "run out of ideas"? Are the older Pokémon "ruined" because of their new evolutions? In a way, yes, Game Freak has; and yes, the older Pokémon are ruined. But at the same time some of the new Pokémon were enormously creative and nothing out of the norm of what had previously been done. Keep reading to see exactly why both are true.
Why make new evolutions?
As stated above, many new evolutions introduced in Gold and Silver were once thought to be "PokéGods". Often these PokéGods were rumoured to evolve from completely ordinary and common Pokémon. Other times they were said to evolve from event Pokémon that were in fact rare and special, such as the starters. This was most likely because people who had trained their starter all the way from level 1 to level 100 would want a final prize for all their hard-earned work; in the same way, a common Pokémon that had long reached its final stage, or never even evolved at all, would give the player a feeling of wanting something "at the end of the rainbow".
Game Freak responded in kind, giving many previous Pokémon the chance to evolve once more, or split down a new path. This was their way of continuing the feeling of excitement and discovery once felt, and prevented the "old" Pokémon from being overshadowed by the new.
Since then, Game Freak has continued the tradition of selecting a choice few Pokémon from the previous generation/s to evolve once more.
Who gets to evolve?
There are various reasons why a Pokémon may get a new (pre)evolution, and those that do generally have more than one.
1.) The Pokémon had potential to go in a creative new direction (Onix into Steelix to show the mineral hardening into metal, or the sudden realization "What if a Shellder bit Slowpoke's head?)
2.) To give a Pokémon with weak stats a "second chance" (Yanmega gave Yanma a significant stat-boost)
3.) The Pokémon was popular enough that adding a new (pre)evolution would attract old fans (Pikachu gaining the baby Pichu)
4.) They were planned from the get-go to have one later on (Who knows?)
They screwed up
Unfortunately, many of the new evolutions introduced in the Fourth Generation seem to have been decided solely on the second reason, even when their stats were perfectly fine. (See Is competitive battling all Game Freak cares about anymore?) The new evolutions have superficial changes (if any at all) and appear to be nothing more than cartoonish exaggerations of their predecessors.
Why is this bad?
Say there was a rare baseball card worth $1,000,000. There's only one in the entire world, which is why it's worth so much. It's bought and sold very rarely, so when someone finally does get it they admire it because it's the only one and they worked hard for it.
Now imagine that another card turned up. Now there's only two in the whole wide world. This instantly devalues the card, making each worth only $75,000 or so... And what if a third card turned up? All three are now worth only $50,000. It's still a lot of money, and all three cards are still incredibly rare, but anyone that has one won't feel exactly the same. After all, other people have it so it's not as special.
This is exactly what has been done with many classic Pokémon. The most obvious examples are Electabuzz and Magmar. Both were very rare (version exclusives, even) and very powerful. Gold and Silver added pre-evolutions to them which reduces their sense of dominance, then Diamond and Pearl added evolutions which in one fell swoop totally reduced their rarity as well as saying "You were never that good to begin with... See? We improved you."
Others are Lickitung, Tangela, Mr. Mime, Scyther, and Jynx. Again, they were all rare. But they also had one defining quality that made them stand out: no evolutions. In a game where evolution is the norm, not evolving is enough to make you special.
The especially sad thing is that many of the new evolutions have very little changes from their previous stage. Lickitung simply has a longer tongue and Tangela now has arms. Sneasel's evolution has bigger claws and more feathers on its head. These are cosmetic changes that don't seem to spark the original concept of evolution, when the next stage might be something exciting and very different.
Is it really that bad?
Most of the new evolutions that get a lot of heat for perceived uncreativity evolve from Pokémon in the First Generation, which suggests a lot. For one, people naturally don't like change. So when they see Pokémon they've known and loved for years get an "enhancement", it's pretty much saying that their childhood wasn't all that great and things are just better now. Looking through the lenses of nostalgia tend to tint everything rosy. Change doesn't sit well with nostalgia.
Secondly, maybe people are just tired of the First Generation Pokémon? The Pokémon from Red and Blue are spread out in more regions than the others are. They're probably seen as being almost common after having being featured in Red and Blue, the Kanto half of Gold and Silver, the Red and Blue remakes, and spread evenly throughout Hoenn and Sinnoh. (And now, it seems, in the Kanto half of the Gold and Silver remakes)
Because of these two reasons it's probably likely that distaste in the new evolutions are at least slightly misdirected. Yes, people don't like them, but it's probably more nostalgia and over-exposure that leads to this dislike rather than entirely uncreativity.
Another thing to consider is that, as stated at the start of this article, speculating on new evolutions is a common activity for Pokémon fans. Many Pokémon, such as Porygon2 and Leafeon, were once rumoured but eventually became official. It's quite possible that Game Freak really does listen and base their choices in new evolutions on popular demand. So it's really our own fault for so adamantly demanding new evolutions then not liking them when we get them. We drive Game Freak's motivation for making these (pre)evolutions in an attempt to satisfy us.
So it may be true that Game Freak has at times "run out of ideas", and has certainly ruined some Pokémon, many others have instead had new life breathed into them when once they may have been forgotten in favour of the newer additions.
In the end, these complaints are more ironic than anything. People complain especially about Magnezone, which is said to have "ruined" Magneton with an uncreative evolution. This is amusing considering that even during the First Generation people complained about Magneton not being creative and just three Magnemite.
It has become a certainty that with each new generation there will be new evolutions as well as a few pre-evolutions of Pokémon from previous generations. Fans typically look forward to finding out which Pokémon will have such a treatment, and there usually is at least one topic on forums that ask users to speculate or "request" new evolutions.
This was probably the thing most looked forward to in the time before Gold and Silver's release, with many eagerly awaiting the long-rumoured Pokégods. While they never arrived exactly as thought, new evolutions did and people were still amazed. Pre-evolutions were actually a surprise, having never been rumoured, so they were also a much-welcomed addition.
This all changed with the release of the fourth generation of Diamond and Pearl, and instantly led to the claim that Game Freak had finally "run out of ideas" and that previous Pokémon were "ruined". Despite completely turning around previous distaste for the third generation, many people still harbor a resentment over the new evolutions.
So has Game Freak really "run out of ideas"? Are the older Pokémon "ruined" because of their new evolutions? In a way, yes, Game Freak has; and yes, the older Pokémon are ruined. But at the same time some of the new Pokémon were enormously creative and nothing out of the norm of what had previously been done. Keep reading to see exactly why both are true.
Why make new evolutions?
As stated above, many new evolutions introduced in Gold and Silver were once thought to be "PokéGods". Often these PokéGods were rumoured to evolve from completely ordinary and common Pokémon. Other times they were said to evolve from event Pokémon that were in fact rare and special, such as the starters. This was most likely because people who had trained their starter all the way from level 1 to level 100 would want a final prize for all their hard-earned work; in the same way, a common Pokémon that had long reached its final stage, or never even evolved at all, would give the player a feeling of wanting something "at the end of the rainbow".
Game Freak responded in kind, giving many previous Pokémon the chance to evolve once more, or split down a new path. This was their way of continuing the feeling of excitement and discovery once felt, and prevented the "old" Pokémon from being overshadowed by the new.
Since then, Game Freak has continued the tradition of selecting a choice few Pokémon from the previous generation/s to evolve once more.
Who gets to evolve?
There are various reasons why a Pokémon may get a new (pre)evolution, and those that do generally have more than one.
1.) The Pokémon had potential to go in a creative new direction (Onix into Steelix to show the mineral hardening into metal, or the sudden realization "What if a Shellder bit Slowpoke's head?)
2.) To give a Pokémon with weak stats a "second chance" (Yanmega gave Yanma a significant stat-boost)
3.) The Pokémon was popular enough that adding a new (pre)evolution would attract old fans (Pikachu gaining the baby Pichu)
4.) They were planned from the get-go to have one later on (Who knows?)
They screwed up
Unfortunately, many of the new evolutions introduced in the Fourth Generation seem to have been decided solely on the second reason, even when their stats were perfectly fine. (See Is competitive battling all Game Freak cares about anymore?) The new evolutions have superficial changes (if any at all) and appear to be nothing more than cartoonish exaggerations of their predecessors.
Why is this bad?
Say there was a rare baseball card worth $1,000,000. There's only one in the entire world, which is why it's worth so much. It's bought and sold very rarely, so when someone finally does get it they admire it because it's the only one and they worked hard for it.
Now imagine that another card turned up. Now there's only two in the whole wide world. This instantly devalues the card, making each worth only $75,000 or so... And what if a third card turned up? All three are now worth only $50,000. It's still a lot of money, and all three cards are still incredibly rare, but anyone that has one won't feel exactly the same. After all, other people have it so it's not as special.
This is exactly what has been done with many classic Pokémon. The most obvious examples are Electabuzz and Magmar. Both were very rare (version exclusives, even) and very powerful. Gold and Silver added pre-evolutions to them which reduces their sense of dominance, then Diamond and Pearl added evolutions which in one fell swoop totally reduced their rarity as well as saying "You were never that good to begin with... See? We improved you."
Others are Lickitung, Tangela, Mr. Mime, Scyther, and Jynx. Again, they were all rare. But they also had one defining quality that made them stand out: no evolutions. In a game where evolution is the norm, not evolving is enough to make you special.
The especially sad thing is that many of the new evolutions have very little changes from their previous stage. Lickitung simply has a longer tongue and Tangela now has arms. Sneasel's evolution has bigger claws and more feathers on its head. These are cosmetic changes that don't seem to spark the original concept of evolution, when the next stage might be something exciting and very different.
Is it really that bad?
Most of the new evolutions that get a lot of heat for perceived uncreativity evolve from Pokémon in the First Generation, which suggests a lot. For one, people naturally don't like change. So when they see Pokémon they've known and loved for years get an "enhancement", it's pretty much saying that their childhood wasn't all that great and things are just better now. Looking through the lenses of nostalgia tend to tint everything rosy. Change doesn't sit well with nostalgia.
Secondly, maybe people are just tired of the First Generation Pokémon? The Pokémon from Red and Blue are spread out in more regions than the others are. They're probably seen as being almost common after having being featured in Red and Blue, the Kanto half of Gold and Silver, the Red and Blue remakes, and spread evenly throughout Hoenn and Sinnoh. (And now, it seems, in the Kanto half of the Gold and Silver remakes)
Because of these two reasons it's probably likely that distaste in the new evolutions are at least slightly misdirected. Yes, people don't like them, but it's probably more nostalgia and over-exposure that leads to this dislike rather than entirely uncreativity.
Another thing to consider is that, as stated at the start of this article, speculating on new evolutions is a common activity for Pokémon fans. Many Pokémon, such as Porygon2 and Leafeon, were once rumoured but eventually became official. It's quite possible that Game Freak really does listen and base their choices in new evolutions on popular demand. So it's really our own fault for so adamantly demanding new evolutions then not liking them when we get them. We drive Game Freak's motivation for making these (pre)evolutions in an attempt to satisfy us.
So it may be true that Game Freak has at times "run out of ideas", and has certainly ruined some Pokémon, many others have instead had new life breathed into them when once they may have been forgotten in favour of the newer additions.
In the end, these complaints are more ironic than anything. People complain especially about Magnezone, which is said to have "ruined" Magneton with an uncreative evolution. This is amusing considering that even during the First Generation people complained about Magneton not being creative and just three Magnemite.
