Listen man, you probably wont agree with me anyway, but I will try to make my point clear anyway. You tell me the gen 1 pokemon you showed in your second row (muk, magneton ed) aren't creative at all. That may be true, but you miss the point.
No I didn't, and I didn't say Muk or Magneton were bad designs, I was comparing them to the Pokemon that the other person said were "lazy" and "lackluster".
People say "Living gears? That's stupid!" yet they forget Magnemite and Magenton from Gen 1 being living magnets.
Or "They didn't even try to be creative with Gen 5!" yet Gen 1 had the living Pokeball Voltorb. And as much as I like Charizard, it's just a fire breathing dragon at the end of the day. (Not saying it isn't creative, but compared to newer Pokemon like Haxorus, it just seems less creative. But Charizard is still one of my favorite Pokemon.)
It is not about creativity. I could also give a piece of bacon a laser and a ice cone on his head and call it creative. Would you like a bacon with a laser and an ice cone in pokemon? (I was hoping you will say no but I am actually starting to like the idea now. ;p)
Creativity is no issue at all. Something doesn't have to be creative to be a succes. Charizard is just a red dragon, not very creative or something. But if you take a look at the strange fire pokemon you posted (emboar) or something, the only thing I can think of it looks like is a sad clown.
A clown? Don't see it, especially when it's stomping around in its sprite animation. Nor do I see anything that says "sad". Perhaps looking up the inspiration for Emboar should come before criticizing it.
Bulbapedia:
"Emboar is based on the soldier of
Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
[1] It and its pre-evolutions, as stated by Ken Sugimori, were designed in a Chinese style. Because of its Chinese style, it may be based on
Zhu Bajie, a pig demon from the Chinese tale
Journey to the West.
Infernape is also based on another character from the novel,
Sun Wukong, and has a similar design as well as the same typing. It seems to also take inspirations of a
pig or
boar in a
professional wrestler's or possibly a
lucha libre's attire. The swirled pattern that surrounds its abdomen is visually similar to the patterns on
ding or
ancient Greek pottery."
So now you know a little of why it looks the way it does, besides just being a boar with flames.
I think it's design is horrible. It is childish, doesn't look like anything and is just too strange, even for a pokemon. It just doesn't look right for me. (and I quote FOR ME) (that means it is an opinion ;p)
Again, you should research a Pokemon before you criticize it. And childish? What exactly about Emboar is childish? (I realize these are just your opinions, but if you dislike something and call it horrible, you should really explain why you believe that.)
Those new pokemon may be so creative as hell, but they just don't look like anything at all.
How can they not look like "anything"? What does that mean? Are you saying there is a limit on what a Pokemon can look like?
Compare the way pokemon developed with the anime. AT first, things looked normal (at least normal in the terms of pocket monsters which you could put in tiny little balls) . Charizard is not very creative, he's just a red dragon. Ash is not very creative, he's just a 10 year old boy. brock is not very creative, his outfit is fairly normal. misty is not very creative, pikachu is not very creative and so on and so on and so on. They were just normal people with normal pokemon which looked alot like their animal counterparts.
Not really. It's anime. None of them look that "normal", nor do the Pokemon look more like animals than the new ones do. Serperior is just as much of a snake as Blastoise is of a turtle.
Besides, the anime is based on the games, not the other way around. Not really sure what point you are trying to make here. So Pokemon should just look basically like a real animal with "upgrades"? You can't just keep turning animals into Pokemon without adding something to make them different than previous Pokemon.
Did we have a problem with it back then? NO.
Because we only had 1 Generation of Pokemon. Only 151, not 649. You had nothing previous to compare it too.
And now all of the sudde, with the new generations, everything has to be creative, weird looking and strange? Why's that?
"Weird looking" and "strange" are strictly opinion, and easily apply to Gen 1 as well. Exeggcute and Exeggutor are certainly strange. "Weird looking" and "strange" is something every Pokemon is to an extent.
Plus, Game Freak can't just do the same thing time and time again. They have to try new ideas and come up with more Pokemon from more creative ideas. That's just business really. Without better ideas, Game Freak goes out of business and Pokemon ends.
Are the pokemon you all loved since you were a child suddenly not good enough anymore because they put a heart shaped nose on a gentically modified zubat?
No. Woobat is not a Zubat. 2 different Pokemon with different movesets and evolution lines. Just because they are both bats doesn't mean anything. Charizard and Dragonite are both very similar dragons, but no one complains about them. (and they're both from Gen 1!)
Is a magneton suddenly not good enough because they set a clown on fire and called it an Emboar?
Ok, this comparison is just wrong. Magneton and Emboar are NOTHING alike. And no, Klinklang doesn't make Magneton less important, nor does Emboar make Charizard less important. Why anyone would think that is beyond me.
Creativity might be good, to an extent. But if you make things too creative, nobody will be able to fell connected to it anymore.
What? More creativity is bad? Makes no sense. I've played the games since the 90's and have never felt that way. Besides, Game Freak still designs their Pokemon to fit in with "the look" they've given all their Pokemon.
It is just like abstract art. It might be supercreative, but I don't feel connected with it. It feels hollow. It is just like the pokemon. The new pokemon just feel too distant for me. They don't feel like real pokemon anymore.
You appear to be putting a limit on what a Pokemon can be or look like. That's like saying "Game Freak should just make generic Pokemon like Gen 1 again". Creativity is not a bad thing, it keeps things from being boring.
Please don't get me wrong, but since this generation came out, you guys all start to talk about things which are wrong about the older generations while you guys all loved them in the past. Suddenly, if you still like the old generations, you are sad and way too nostalgic. That is utter nonsence.
I love all 5 Generations. All I'm doing is showing people that the same things they say like "Ice cream Pokemon? That's stupid! That's food, not a Pokemon!" even though we had Exeggcute and Exeggutor (eggs and a pineapple) in Gen 1. See? People are unfairly accusing Gen 5 of having things that makes them suck or "not Pokemon" when Gen 1 had these things as well, but they refuse to acknowledge it and say "Nope, Vanillite sucks, Exeggcute is a REAL Pokemon!" yet they just said a food Pokemon is a dumb idea.
And no, I'm not overly nostalgic, in fact, that is what I'm trying to stop from happening. People just automatically say "Gen 1 is best! There are only 151 real Pokemon. The rest are crap!" THAT is nostalgia at its worst.
I liked the new things in B and W, but I just don't like the pokemon. That is my opinion. That doesn't mean I'm sad or nostalgic, that means I have my own preferences. The old pokemon are the 'real' pokemon for me.
You don't have to like the Pokemon, but to say they suck or are "lackluster" as has been use, is just wrong and requires explaining. But yes, part of it is nostalgia, saying that the original Pokemon are the "real" ones is very much a nostalgic statement.
The new pokemon (with some exceptions) are just hollow shells in comparison to the older ones.
Many of Gen 5's Pokemon were meant to be very similar to Gen 1's Pokemon. (Like Machop and Timburr, Magnemite and Klink, Sawk & Throh and Hitmonlee & Hitmonchan) It was part of the "reboot" that Black and White was supposed to be, which is why in the games, you only see new Pokemon, just like in Gen 1. But the new Pokemon are also still very different from the older ones, which still makes the old one relevant.
Not every new pokemon, they still got it in them, (the legendaries as an example are very well made) but this generation just doesn't work for me. (maybe if B and W 2 come out, if I put more time in the game the acceptance might come.)
Yes, usually, the more you see a Pokemon and understand it, you will grow to accept it. That's how Pokemon works. You generally have 3-4 years to get use to new Pokemon before a new Generation comes out and you have more new Pokemon to learn about.
I hope you guys realize this is just an opinion of mine. You don't have to agree (what you guys probably don't do anyway) but keep in mind that this is the way I think about it and that it is not 'fact based'
Yes, you are totally free to have opinions. But like I said before, you should really look up the inspirations for these Pokemon before you decide they are uncreative. Reshiram and Zekrom aren't just 2 dragons, they are based on the whole Taoism relation, which introduced Kyurem, and introduced the first ever time 2 Pokemon merge bodies in-game. All we want people (not just you, but everyone) to do is give the new Pokemon a chance before just deciding they suck.
