- 11
- Posts
- 17
- Years
- Seen Feb 1, 2008
Why does it seem as though everyone hates lots of the newest additions? I don't think they look THAT bad, and while some of them do seem to look like they're less pokemon-ish to me, it could've been worse. I'm not sticking up for any blatant stupidity on nintendo's behalf, but I seem to have no problem with this gen. Honestly, it's not my favorite, but it's not really all as bad as it seems.. Being a pokemon fan, I'm just happy that I have more pokemon to look for. Gives me more to do when I'm bored.
By the way, I could care less about who you are or how creative you are, I'm telling you now that you can't exactly pull 1,000 totally unique creatures out of your rear without having quite a few that look similar.
And, it actually makes sense to have pokemon that have similar body structures. You could say that they're just lazy, and that could be true. But, honestly, I'd be as lazy as anyone else.. Dogs look like dogs, cats look like cats. If you were god, and were going to systematically create sub-species, the dogs would look different but would have the same overall main qualities that a dog has.
Apply this to any animal-based pokemon. The non-animal-based pokemon are mostly original and different looking, unless you can point some out for me.
Hell, think about it realistically as I do if you have to; Most species of fish (example) have the same body structure, just different appearances. Lapras and Gastrodon are of a similar species grouping, therefore they'd have the same structure.
I mean, you wouldn't have a sea slug with legs and arms shooting water out of it's ass while another one looks like a blob with a shell and squishy studs for it's arms/legs if they're supposed to be relatives. :s
One final thing.. I keep hearing some people that say that they shouldn't add completely new pokemon in the next version. Someone actually said something along the lines of "I don't want pokemon to change into a completely different game"... I strongly disagree. Why have three or four new pokemon games where you catch the same 400 pokemon? No new ones? I'd just finish my pearl and be done with the game since I already have them all..
Sorry for the ranting. If you're going to flame me for whatever unecessarily moronic reason, then leave this thread.
By the way, I could care less about who you are or how creative you are, I'm telling you now that you can't exactly pull 1,000 totally unique creatures out of your rear without having quite a few that look similar.
And, it actually makes sense to have pokemon that have similar body structures. You could say that they're just lazy, and that could be true. But, honestly, I'd be as lazy as anyone else.. Dogs look like dogs, cats look like cats. If you were god, and were going to systematically create sub-species, the dogs would look different but would have the same overall main qualities that a dog has.
Apply this to any animal-based pokemon. The non-animal-based pokemon are mostly original and different looking, unless you can point some out for me.
Hell, think about it realistically as I do if you have to; Most species of fish (example) have the same body structure, just different appearances. Lapras and Gastrodon are of a similar species grouping, therefore they'd have the same structure.
I mean, you wouldn't have a sea slug with legs and arms shooting water out of it's ass while another one looks like a blob with a shell and squishy studs for it's arms/legs if they're supposed to be relatives. :s
One final thing.. I keep hearing some people that say that they shouldn't add completely new pokemon in the next version. Someone actually said something along the lines of "I don't want pokemon to change into a completely different game"... I strongly disagree. Why have three or four new pokemon games where you catch the same 400 pokemon? No new ones? I'd just finish my pearl and be done with the game since I already have them all..
Sorry for the ranting. If you're going to flame me for whatever unecessarily moronic reason, then leave this thread.