Which gen has the worst new pokemon?

Many of the best Pokémon come from Generation I when I look back. After giving it much thought, generation II definitely introduced the worse Pokémon in the franchise. The Starter Pokémon, for example, are pretty bad except for Feraligatr. Meganium fails in its role as a defensive Pokémon because it has too many weaknesses and not enough defensive stats to truly wall, and Typhlosion is painfully average. Many of them are statistically weak with a few exceptions such as Tyranitar, Crobat, Espeon, Umbreon, Steelix, Scizor, Heracross, Kingdra, Slowking, Blissey, the legendary beasts, Lugia, Ho-Oh, and Celebi. Other good Pokémon find use in their Abilities and other things such as movepools like Azumarill, Quagsire, and Politoed. Other than this, many of them suck and are forgettable. It's why so many Generation II Pokémon later received evolutions in other gens and why many Gen II Pokémon weren't even available in their own generation they were introduced in until you reached post-game (Kanto). Generation V introduced the best new Pokémon. Many of the best Pokémon to use in battle came from Generation V. It introduced Hidden Abilities to the franchise and was the reason the Fairy-type had to be created.
 
CoolKid575 said:
Unpopular opinion: I think Gen 5 has the weakest roster. Now don't get me wrong, Gen 5 has some GREAT Pokemon and some of my all-time favorites like Krookodile, Vanilluxe and Escavalier. However there are also a lot of blatant copies of Gen 1 Pokemon and a lot of the new designs just don't land with me.
Click to expand...

Probably not unpopular. Main issue with Gen 5's roster seems to be that many of the Pokémon were created as straight replacements for previously existing ones, instead of creatures that could stand out by their own. So the Pokédex ended up with quite a few filler Pokémon that wouldn't have even existed if BW weren't conceived as soft-reboot games without any Pokémon from previous gens.
 
Corveone said:
Probably not unpopular. Main issue with Gen 5's roster seems to be that many of the Pokémon were created as straight replacements for previously existing ones, instead of creatures that could stand out by their own. So the Pokédex ended up with quite a few filler Pokémon that wouldn't have even existed if BW weren't conceived as soft-reboot games without any Pokémon from previous gens.
Click to expand...

Although I absolutely love Gen 5....I see.. This is an interesting perspective. Never thought of things this way. Might have been a hard let-down for long timers to play the first two Unova games.
 
Gen 9 to me. Dachsbun looked cool until I got one for myself and now it looks like it has weaved scoliosis, Garganacl and the future paradox forms don't do it for me, Koraidon looks a bit too intense for me, too many details. I'm not a fan of the Tinkaton family, or really a huge fan of any other families other than Cetoddle and Cetitan. Lechonk is great, but I'm not into Oinkologne. The starters don't do it for me, but they also haven't since B/W.
 
Kind of difficult to say, because every generation has some good designs and some truly awful ones. I think on balance I would say either Generation III or V has the highest number of designs I dislike the most, but those are both larger generations, so there are bound to be more in there on that basis. Although with Generation V a lot of them were designed to be replacements or parallels to older Pokemon and they...didn't do a very good job with it. The Timburr line is clearly designed to evoke the Machop line and they're awful, Throh/Sawk are reminiscent of Hitmonlee/Hitmonchan and the less said about them the better, and so on. I do like the Roggenrola line quite a bit, though. But Gen V also introduced the elemental monkeys, the Swords of Justice, has the weakest Normal/Flying early route bird design, the least appealing two-stage Normal-type rodent in Patrat/Watchog, and...well, it's easier for me to think of Pokemon from Gen V I dislike rather than ones I like.
 
I think the Gen IV is the worst in this regard. I think they tried way too hard to make everything as cool for the young generation as possible and it resulted in some funny designs. Especially the new evolution lines for older Pokémon. I still can't understand what were they thinking, when they made them.

On the other hand, I generally like Pokémon designs since Gen VI.
 
It's a toss up between generation I, generation II and generation VIII for me. I think a lot of Kantonian Pokémon are a tad boring, and have been completely over saturated throughout the Pokémon franchise's history, as many receive unwarranted favouritism. I also am of the opinion that Pokémon from Johto are a bit bland or unmemorable as well, and there are few that rank high on my list of favourite Pokémon overall. Generation 8 introduced my least favourite starters to date, and while there were some fabulous Pokémon introduced, there were some lacklustre ones as well. In comparison to other generations, these three fall flat, though I wouldn't necessarily say any are bad, not at all.
 
Last edited:
Squirtkipfan01 said:
forgetable? Same generation as lucario, garchomp, gallade, all the legendaries and mythicals and FORGETABLE?!? I just dont agree with that at all man. Also feel like im the only one that likes magmortar
Click to expand...

I agree with you Sinnoh probably has the best designs in my opinion (why do people dislike Magmortar so much he is pretty cool in my book)
 
Ninetales said:
I also am of the opinion that Pokémon from Johto are a bit bland or unmemorable as well, and there are few that rank high on my list of favourite Pokémon overall.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with the Johto statement, solely because a lot of the pokemon introduced in gen 2 felt unfinished for me. I do have my favorites like Scizor, Espeon, Umbreon, Ampharos, Tyranitar, the Johto starters and Ursaring, but you got pokemon like Aipom, Noctowl-line, Sentret-line, Ledian-line, Ariados-line, Jumpluff-line, Dunsparce, Delibird, and baby pokemon. Many of these gen 2 designs felt like filler or pokemon that simply did not make the cut for gen 1. These birds, spiders, lady bugs, cotton-mons, punching bags, and dunsparce felt like they lacked something. I am under the bias of loving what gen 4 did with several of the Johto-mons by giving them new evolutions because gen 4 was my introduction to pokemon.
 
Weren't Johto Pokémon made with the idea of being simpler designs because they wanted to make plushes of them? I recall a developer saying something like that in an interview, and about how they wanted to start testing waters with more bizarre and risky designs in Gen 3.

I find the simplicity in Johto's design quite charming for the most part. Think it's fine if different gens try to somewhat experiment with different styles (as long as they don't stray too far)
 
Squirtkipfan01 said:
Think its because as a fire type its pretty poor stat wise. Looks wise its great
Click to expand...

I don't know about other people, but this is not my reasoning at all. I find its design to be hideous, and that's purely why I dislike it. I had no idea there were people who actually liked it design. Interesting. To each their own.
 
Rock_Salazar said:
I actually agree with the Johto statement, solely because a lot of the pokemon introduced in gen 2 felt unfinished for me. I do have my favorites like Scizor, Espeon, Umbreon, Ampharos, Tyranitar, the Johto starters and Ursaring, but you got pokemon like Aipom, Noctowl-line, Sentret-line, Ledian-line, Ariados-line, Jumpluff-line, Dunsparce, Delibird, and baby pokemon. Many of these gen 2 designs felt like filler or pokemon that simply did not make the cut for gen 1. These birds, spiders, lady bugs, cotton-mons, punching bags, and dunsparce felt they lacked something. I am under the bias of loving what gen 4 did with several of the Johto-mons by giving them new evolutions because gen 4 was my introduction to pokemon.
Click to expand...

It's interesting because I'm quite fond of the baby Pokémon, the Jumpluff-line, and some of the other Pokémon you mentioned.
My favourite from Johto is Espeon, though, undoubtably. I do like the majority of Generation 2 Pokémon, but most I regard with indifference.

Also I do like Magmortar, it's much better design-wise than Magmar. Magmar is atrocious.
 
Probably gen 2. A lot of them were pretty eh and needed something else from another gen to stand out. That being said there's still Pokémon I like in gen 2.

There isn't really a roster I outright dislike as a whole.
 
The reason the original 151 had a lot of bland Pokémon is that there were four programmers trying to make Mr. Satoshi Tajiri's concept manageable as a Game Boy title at a time when video games were still thought to be a volatile market (albeit, not as much as the NES days), and there was no quick internet database on people's favorite existing monsters throughout all of recorded history. (I know the internet existed, but it was a luxury item in 1995-1996. Google didn't exist.) It goes beyond "there were no Pokemon to work in the beginning." The team was very small in the beginning, and they were very fortunate to have involvement from Nintendo staff. I understand Geodude and Golbat aren't a lot of people's favorites, but I think it's important to remember that video games are exceedingly difficult to make, especially when there were only four actual programmers. I don't want to excuse every little mistake in Gen I like "Oh, Red and Blue are fine to play even today." I just feel like a lot of the replies in this thread dismissed the very first reply here.

I recently worked with a template to determine my favorite Pokémon of each type of each Gen, and, well, I don't mean to be rude, but I couldn't finish the row for Gen 7. I think there were five or so blank spots, and no other generation had any blank spots (excluding Gen I Dark Types where I was given the option to put "Missingno" as a joke). I mean, there were some where I had to begrudgingly pick something (like Gen III's Bug- and Ice-types) to get the image complete, but I just don't clique with Gen 7's Pokémon. Maybe one day I'll finish Ultra Moon and think "Wow, that was great! I had a lot of fun," but I'm just not a big fan of Gen 7 monsters.

If I was going to argue on a more "objective" standard than just "I don't like these designs from an artistic standpoint" (not that I believe opinions can be objectively true), I feel like Gen II has very few completely original monsters that are useful and aesthetically appealing (ignoring Gen 3 and onward evolutions of Gen 2 mon like Honchkrow, which I really like aesthetically), and they got carried away with baby Pokémon. I don't hate baby Pokémon, but I'm not gonna stop them from evolving, so they're kind of moot entries in the PokéDex.

I hope I didn't come off as too preachy. I know the original 151 has problems.

EDIT: I forgot to check if there was a page 2. I'm sorry.
 
Reginald Cosmic said:
The reason the original 151 had a lot of bland Pokémon is that there were four programmers trying to make Mr. Satoshi Tajiri's concept manageable as a Game Boy title at a time when video games were still thought to be a volatile market (albeit, not as much as the NES days), and there was no quick internet database on people's favorite existing monsters throughout all of recorded history. (I know the internet existed, but it was a luxury item in 1995-1996. Google didn't exist.) It goes beyond "there were no Pokemon to work in the beginning." The team was very small in the beginning, and they were very fortunate to have involvement from Nintendo staff. I understand Geodude and Golbat aren't a lot of people's favorites, but I think it's important to remember that video games are exceedingly difficult to make, especially when there were only four actual programmers. I don't want to excuse every little mistake in Gen I like "Oh, Red and Blue are fine to play even today." I just feel like a lot of the replies in this thread dismissed the very first reply here.

I recently worked with a template to determine my favorite Pokémon of each type of each Gen, and, well, I don't mean to be rude, but I couldn't finish the row for Gen 7. I think there were five or so blank spots, and no other generation had any blank spots (excluding Gen I Dark Types where I was given the option to put "Missingno" as a joke). I mean, there were some where I had to begrudgingly pick something (like Gen III's Bug- and Ice-types) to get the image complete, but I just don't clique with Gen 7's Pokémon. Maybe one day I'll finish Ultra Moon and think "Wow, that was great! I had a lot of fun," but I'm just not a big fan of Gen 7 monsters.

If I was going to argue on a more "objective" standard than just "I don't like these designs from an artistic standpoint" (not that I believe opinions can be objectively true), I feel like Gen II has very few completely original monsters that are useful and aesthetically appealing (ignoring Gen 3 and onward evolutions of Gen 2 mon like Honchkrow, which I really like aesthetically), and they got carried away with baby Pokémon. I don't hate baby Pokémon, but I'm not gonna stop them from evolving, so they're kind of moot entries in the PokéDex.

I hope I didn't come off as too preachy. I know the original 151 has problems.

EDIT: I forgot to check if there was a page 2. I'm sorry.
Click to expand...

Np with the post thing

And im well aware that pokemon gen 1 was a new thing, with a small team of people trying to make it work. I absolutely cant take away its iconicness at all. But we are up to gen 9 and i can still say that most pokemon in gen 1 are bland or subpar just because its the first attempt, only can go up afterwards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top