Pokémon (Not-So) Griefing Thread - Gen 9 announced: Scarlet and Violet, Releasing Late 2022

  • Registration is closed without referral. This is a website about Internet drama.

Nauseated Courgi

Bulldogs are cool dogs, guys!
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jun 12, 2019
Well I mean just look at some of the designs, they just manage how the older Pokemon designs just have so much more appeal or balance of designs compare for modern designs, there’s a strong reason why Gens one and two are still mainly the most referenced and used Pokemon in even modern discussions and promotion for the franchise. The old classic 90s/ early 2000s Mon are pretty much the first Pokemon people think of when they here the name., and used whenever referenced in other media like internet parodies or references in other games of media.

Like for instance look at the starter Pokemon for Gen 3 Tochiq, Treeko and the iconic Mudkipz and the designs are just cute and not excessively complicated, they balance the right amount of cute and awesome, torchique is literally just a few circles, treeko is a cute lizard type creature and mudkipz is iconic and composed of only a few simple shapes. Such eye catching designs, stay in the players head and retain all the core values of Pokemon design, cute whilst still being cool and simple enough to be recognisable as a silhouette. None of this overly complex stuff of later gens.

View attachment 2916114
View attachment 2916113

I mean just look at the difference in evolutionary designs, the original while looking increasingly mature and detailed still mainly capture the ‘essence’ of the base forms. These later designs aren’t necessarily bad, but they just seem lacklustre when compared to the more fine tuned designs of the classic era? Do you kind of see what I mean?
Yeah... I don't see it. Like I said, the design philosophy for the pokemon has remained the same throughout the generations. The example you gave is on par compared with the gen 3 starters: they start out cute and simple then, as they evolve, they get more complex designs that vaguely resemble where they came from.

You could make a point with Incineroar as it did just become a biped out of nowhere, but the others were designed just like the earlier starters.

Pretty sure this is just a case of you not liking the designs rather than there being anything wrong with them.

Edit: Spelling
 
Last edited:

Rotollo 2

Shootmatora
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
The reintroduction of shrinking mons has made some good memes
1643060774987.png

1643050502940.png1643060651153.png
1643053161529.png
 
Last edited:

Kermit Jizz

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 1, 2021
Yeah... I don't see it. Like I said, the design philosophy for the pokemon has remained the same throughout the generations.
I like most pokemon designs, at least I did barring PLA, but you can't deny design philosophies changed heavily from gen to gen. The most apparent design shift over the years has been the lerger head/eye to body ratio on smaller mons, but you can point to a lot of other things like gen 4 generally having rounder bodies than prior gens.
 

Wingnut

WARNING: Remove before flight.
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 10, 2020
I gotta say, I'm actually once again excited for a Pokemon game, given the positive impressions from people who have played it early. While the graphics may be rather underwhelming, everything else sounds quite interesting.

It's basically Breath Of The Wild mixed with Monster Hunter.
If I can deal with the jpg fruit that Three Houses had I can deal with the tree bark texture in PLA.
 

Juan's Sombrero

Pirate sites are your friend.
kiwifarms.net
Joined
May 12, 2020
@The Gangster Computer
So this is supposed to be the lost sister of the genie trio from BW and she can turn into a turtle snake scorpion thing... This is a thing. At least they didn't make it male, otherwise twitter would be latching on to this thing as the first gay or troon pokemon.
You underestimate their autism.
 
Last edited:

Toxinophile

"Kiwi Farms is a safe-for-work website."
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
I mean just look at the difference in evolutionary designs, the original while looking increasingly mature and detailed still mainly capture the ‘essence’ of the base forms. These later designs aren’t necessarily bad, but they just seem lacklustre when compared to the more fine tuned designs of the classic era? Do you kind of see what I mean?
All that typing and the best you could come up with is that the gen 7 final evolution mons don't have as much "essence," or they aren't as "iconic" as Gen 3's Pokemon? They are so many ways to argue why the newer designs aren't as good as the originals, and yet you decided that "essence" and "iconic" would be the most persuasive words to use. You wasting words and by proxy my time describing basic character design and other inane trivia that add nothing your argument. Your poor attempt at discussion was so offensively disappointing that I had to make my own argument against the new Pokemon.

Why the New (starter) Pokemon Designs are Weaker than the OGs.

Starting with Generation 6, a distinct pattern appears as the games' starter Pokemon become more and more anthropomorphic. For example the Gen 6 Pokemon starters evolve into upright animals that reference fantasy classes with Rodent Knight, Fox Wizard, and Frog Ninja. In Sun & Moon there wasn't much of a theme but the starter trio were still given human qualities with Owl Archer, Cat Wrestler, and Seal Singer. Finally by the time Sword & Shield releases the starters have become cartoonish caricatures of animals with British-themed Gorilla Drummer, Soccer Rabbit, and Chameleon Spy.

Generations 1-5 comparatively, their starters never get this humanized. The Pokemon starters in all of their forms, are objectively "animals with elemental powers" first. They never stray into the category of "Cartoon animal person with easily defined career and personality." Such a category is quite absurd already as Pokemon within a species do not and should not, share the same career-specific personality. There should be room for imagination from the player, as the average player would want to create their own unique and personal friendship with their starter.

But instead Game Freak gives us these pre-packaged, almost Dating sim-esque personalities for starters that isn't nearly as compelling. You do not have as much freedom with the kind of friendship you have with Wrestling Bara Cator Spunky Soccer Bunnymansince it's very hard to imagine them with any other personality. If you wanted a bunny or cat starter Pokemon but not as a heel wrestler or a competitive soccer player then you're shit-out-of-luck. But with more animalistic Pokemon like Charizard and Mudkip they aren't tied down to a personality that you might subjectively dislike, so they end up a lot more universally appealing. Despite the millions of dollars and manhours GF put into their newer designs, It's very telling that the most beloved (starter) Pokemon are the ones that stay true to the phrase "Pocket Monsters."

Edited for clarity. I'm too much of a clickbaity bitch for my own good.
 
Last edited:

Sundae

Clown Mutt
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Aug 5, 2018
Someone made and posted a google doc detailing where to find each Pokemon in Legends:

Google doc with stats, BSTs, moves, and other info for the new Pokemon:

Some more screenshots of Pokemon size differences:
pla poke sizes.png

pla poke sizes 2.png

pla poke sizes 3.png

Video showing how wild non-aggressive Pokemon (in this case a Bidoof) interact with you and your Pokemon:


Glitch that let's you walk up mountains:


Video showing Sneasler gameplay and Darkrai:


So according to the person who posted the video, you have to have save data from either Brilliant Diamond or Shining Pear in order to get the quest to get Darkrai (and you have to have beaten the main story line).


Youtube video that answers some questions about the game:

Some info from the vid:
-You get access to trading about an hour into the game
-As mentioned earlier in the thread, you can catch the game's other 2 startes in distortions, but according to the video the starters only appear after beating the story
-You can 100% the entire game without having to trade (every Pokemon in game is available to you in some way)
-There's no breeding
-No multiplayer
-There's a system in game where you can find items dropped by others, and they can find your dropped items (items lost from being knocked out by a Pokemon). He doesn't go into further detail on this, says you'll learn more about it in game.
-Your character can be inflicted with Pokemon status ailments (poison, sleep, paralyzed, confused, etc.)
-Alpha Pokemon can spawn again later after being caught
-Status moves change both Physical and Special (example, Swords Dance raises Attack and Special Attack)
 
Last edited:

Disc

Mouth's feeling a little dry.
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 23, 2019
Why the New Pokemon Designs are Weaker than the OGs.
That alone doesn't explain why, even accounting for the different amount of Pokemon, the most popular polled result from 2021 is Greninja, a pokemon with a very rigid personality and stereotype. (And before you say that less pokemon in the gen = the illusion of pokemon being more popular, that doesn't hold when you compare their top 30s and kantos overtake Kalos of equal ranks by their respective third places.)

In fact, all of the Pokemon that beat all kanto pokemon in that popularity poll - Mimikyu, Lucario, and Greninja - are pokemon that both have a clear personality associated with them and have that personality reinforced by additional media. As do the two kanto pokemon that topped the charts - Gengar and Charizard. For someone railing on your predecessor's lack of detail, you're not exactly making a hard, evidentiary statement yourself.

And lastly, starters are not a great indicator of how the generation as a whole will be distinct. this whole thing is more a screed on the anthropomorphism increase among starters than any larger trend among pokemon.

I mean just look at the difference in evolutionary designs, the original while looking increasingly mature and detailed still mainly capture the ‘essence’ of the base forms. These later designs aren’t necessarily bad, but they just seem lacklustre when compared to the more fine tuned designs of the classic era? Do you kind of see what I mean?
Blaziken does everything you're complaining about the modern gens doing. I do not look at Torchic and blaziken and think there was no weird steps in the middle there. It goes from being armless with clawed feet to having clawed arms and hakama bottoms. It anthropomorphises a into a martial artist, which gives it a pretty clear intended personality. What traits they do share look wildly different on each one. And the one that stays closest to the base design, Swampert, is significantly less popular than the other 2.

Really, I tend to feel that "which pokemon gens look good" is so muddled by game limitations, nostalgia, balance, anime appearances, prominence in game, surrounding environment, utility, marketing pushes, and so many other things that I really have given up trying to understand them.
 

Rotollo 2

Shootmatora
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Glitch that let's you walk up mountains:
Your browser is not able to display this video.
Skyrim Mon

I know this will probably be patched out but please don't, this is too based to be removed. if we are going to have jank, I'm glad it's something fun like this than the usual boring quirks like ladders freezing time. again this shit is like everything I love in games put into one in some ways.
Edit: Shrink lore 2
1643101713429.png
1643092856145.png
1643101541640.png
1643094623147.png
/vp/ arguing more about if this fact being brought up again as dumb or not drowning out discussion of the game itself is the best part of this leak season
 
Last edited:

Toxinophile

"Kiwi Farms is a safe-for-work website."
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Well, It's seems my spontaneous argument has been challenged, Let's see how long I can defend it.
That alone doesn't explain why, even accounting for the different amount of Pokemon, the most popular polled result from 2021 is Greninja, a pokemon with a very rigid personality and stereotype.
Well of course the more personable Pokemon is more popular in the anime, but I'm not talking about the anime. I've never said once anything about the anime at all. I'm talking about the games here, G-A-M-E-S. I'm talking about how these newer Pokemon starter designs are too human for these games about a world of very animal-like creatures with mystical powers.
In fact, all of the Pokemon that beat all kanto pokemon in that popularity poll - Mimikyu, Lucario, and Greninja - are pokemon that both have a clear personality associated with them and have that personality reinforced by additional media. As do the two kanto pokemon that topped the charts - Gengar and Charizard.
Are you for real? Popularity polls are never a reliable indication of any measure for understanding which starter is objectively better designed. Popularity polls are a complete subjective mess of demographics, ideas, and opinions that arbitrarily changes all the time. Do people love Greninja because of the games or the anime? Is it mostly kids or adults that love him? Do they love him for his design or moveset? or both? You can't fucking tell because all this data is dumped into a countless number of unregulated social media polls.

I have made it clear cut that in my argument, regardless of popularity, that these newer starters function poorly as the blank templates the player can impose an identity upon. The mainline games have always been about making your own adventure narrative thru the world of Pokemon. Thus the starter becomes an important part of this narrative as very rarely will the player replace them. In that sense, the starter needs to be much less personified to let the natural narrative thru the creative thoughts and actions of the player continue unimpeded.

But when the starter becomes so heavily defined thru gameplay and visual design, it feels less like a pet animal you are raising up but more like leveling up a named character in a RPG. There is a definite loss of unique interactions when the starter Pokemon, a creature the player most likely nicknamed themselves, evolves into a pre-personified caricature that the player had no part in. The whole concept of the Pokemon games has been about making your unique team/collection of varied pocket monsters, but that concept suffers in execution when your starter doesn't feel as unique as the player wants it to be.
Really, I tend to feel that "which pokemon gens look good" is so muddled by game limitations, nostalgia, balance, anime appearances, prominence in game, surrounding environment, utility, marketing pushes, and so many other things that I really have given up trying to understand them.
Amen dude, but next you shouldn't put that in your counterargument since it discredits the persuasiveness. It becomes hard to convince the reader to your side of the debate when you reveal that you don't even feel that confident about it.
 

Disc

Mouth's feeling a little dry.
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 23, 2019
Amen dude, but next you shouldn't put that in your counterargument since it discredits the persuasiveness. It becomes hard to convince the reader to your side of the debate when you reveal that you don't even feel that confident about it.
Starting with the end here, but it's for a reason. I'm not arguing with you on "these are good designs for the purpose you have stated". I'm arguing you on "your argument has significant flaws in it's premise, and even arguing the point is in and of itself stupid"

Well of course the more personable Pokemon is more popular in the anime, but I'm not talking about the anime. I've never said once anything about the anime at all. I'm talking about the games here, G-A-M-E-S. I'm talking about how these newer Pokemon starter designs are too human for these games about a world of very animal-like creatures with mystical powers.
You can't act like how a pokemon is presented in other media won't affect how it's received in game. Most people will come to play pokemon because they saw some somewhere and want to use them. Therefore, the personalities starters are presented with in other media have a huge effect on their reception in the games. You can't talk about them in a bubble.

The big problem I have with your argument is that you frame it as something like this:
  1. Pokemon are generally monsters first and foremost, and the starters should emphasize that.
  2. Starters should thus not have clear basis in human jobs by default, and should instead emphasize the beastly traits to be more flexible in personality, allowing the player to anthropomorphise them freely.
Firstly, I challenge your premise. Pokemon are literally all shapes and sizes, from sentient blobs to humanoid, and starters have never been a grand indicator of the variety or monstrous possibilities you proclaim they are. The original starter trio are literally all scaly, tough-looking reptiles, which is surprisingly uncommon in Kanto as a whole, and certainly not a good indicator of it's strongest and most interesting pokemon. The legendary birds are, well, birds, and mewtwo is very much humanised. Gyarados you could argue, but Dragonite is one of the doofiest dragons in the series.

Compare that to our spoonbender Alakazam, our wrestling champ Machamp, Jynx the singer, Mr. Mime, Hitmonlee and Chan, resident Fatass Snorlax, Hypno, or the pokemon that become two-armed bipeds as they evolve, like Rhydon, Kabutops, Poliwrath, Vileplume, Mankey losing it's tail and gaining human accessories, so much more.

This measure, and the standard you've pulled from it, are both arbitrary and aren't really reinforced in reality - you've kinda just pulled it from your ass.

Secondly, I challenge your premise that pokemon with less defined personalities will make for better starters. I distinctly remember gravitating to some starters specifically because of clear-cut personality - hell, there were whole memes about Smugleaf Snivy's personality, and I personally gravitated to it for that. These characteristics don't make them blank slates, but depending on the person, they can be the seed from which ideas grow about their nuances of their personality, or the personality they're embedded with might be naturally attractive regardless.

(On a related note, I find your drawn line of Gen 6 very dodgy, and not acknowledging the careers and personality expressed in at least Empoleon, Infernape, Blaziken and all the Gen 5 starters. Solely bipedal final stages started at 6, but none of this career/personality measure you're pointing to did. I could also point to Charizard clearly being a fierce dragon archetype and how that implies some very obvious personality traits, but I think it's clear that this is more about human archetypes than raw personality.)

Are you for real? Popularity polls are never a reliable indication of any measure for understanding which starter is objectively better designed. Popularity polls are a complete subjective mess of demographics, ideas, and opinions that arbitrarily changes all the time. Do people love Greninja because of the games or the anime? Is it mostly kids or adults that love him? Do they love him for his design or moveset? or both? You can't fucking tell because all this data is dumped into a countless number of unregulated social media polls.
Putting aside that your final word in the first one talks about which Pokemon are most beloved, yet you never explain how you determined that...

Trying to argue that one set is "objectively" better designed is stupid, and you should know better. You have a standard by which you're measuring, but it's a completely arbitrary one that isn't really based in anything other than your perception of what kids will respond to best - which you haven't evidenced.

As for the rest of the paragraph, that is my point you dumb of fuck. You are trying to apply an objective veneer to an incredibly subjective topic, one that is heavily influenced by dozens of factors external to the character design itself. Which is why, to me, the standards you are measuring don't stand up to scrutiny. You're applying them after the fact, trying to apply a simple yardstick to an inherently subjective and infinitely corrupted topic.

My point is not that these starters are as good as the classics. My point is that trying to act like there's some single objective measure of what makes a good starter is ridiculous, and this is where the shaky parts of your argument come from.
 

Nauseated Courgi

Bulldogs are cool dogs, guys!
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jun 12, 2019
That last one is alot of cherry picking examples and has often been used to bash the newer designs as “souless.” Also that old school looking Zorua is awful.
Yeah, rather or not pokemon designs are bad is and always has been a subjective matter.

All the old-school fans giving all of their reasons for why "new pokemon bad" can be applied to older mons as well.
"The new pokemon look like too simple"

So does Dragonite. It looks like a living plush toy compared to the other fearsome beast we got later and Wigglytuff looks like a beanbag with limbs and ears. Not to mention Chansey, Clefable, Gengar, Electrode and many others.

"The new pokemon are too human!"

So does Alakazam, Hitmonchan/lee/top, Jynx, etc.

Really, it just comes down to the older fans not liking the new mons because they aren't the ones they grew up with. That's fine, but that doesn't mean there's anything particularly wrong with new designs.

Even when PLA's mons got leaked everyone in this thread reacted to them differently. Hell, some people even warmed up to them.

Tl;Dr: There's no such thing as an objectively good or bad pokemon design.
 

Rotollo 2

Shootmatora
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Really, it just comes down to the older fans not liking the new mons because they aren't the ones they grew up with. That's fine, but that doesn't mean there's anything particularly wrong with new designs.

Even when PLA's mons got leaked everyone in this thread reacted to them differently. Hell, some people even warmed up to them.
I don't think it's always "Old good, New bad" for some people its a lot of different factors. While I do not think there may be an "overall shift" in designs universally I do think each region has it's own design philosophy. For example, new Kalos mons have different priorities from Galar mons that have different priorities from Hoenn ect. ect.
Stuff like this can happen with cross gen evos sometimes, like back in sinnoh itself there was a major distaste for pokemon like electivire, rhyperior or togakiss in "ruining old designs" while people like me still really love them (except Rhyperior, nothing can make him good lmao).
And sometimes due to external factors you just never will warm up to a region's style and thats fine, like for example while I warmed up to these Hisian forms pretty quickly I don't think I ever will do that for the vast majority of galar mons. and you know what, thats fine because with over 900 creatures, there's sure to be a few returning ones you're okay to use even if the new batch are an entire miss in connecting to you.