• Hey guys! Have you heard? We now have popup
    Yes, Popups!
    messages for your forum posts. Learn more about it here!
  • To keep up with the hype driven by Sword and Shield's release, we are taking applications for new moderators in our Current Events: Sword and Shield as well as Anime and Manga sections. Applications are due by November 26th.

    For more information, see this thread.We hope you all consider joining our team!
  • We hope you're enjoying Sword and Shield so far! So that everyone can enjoy it and not be spoiled, please keep the all story spoilers and any images from the games in the appropriate sections or in spoiler tags until January 3rd.

    Since spoiler tags are not allowed in signatures, please do not put images from the games in your signature either. You can list the names of new Pokémon if you want to list your team in your signature.

Aesthetics vs. functionality?

Lt.

Powerful Foaming Clenser!
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
794
Reaction score
0
why is everyone saying Rhyperior is ugly? He is epic!

anyway,i choose function
there is no pokemon i hate more than Parchirusu. it is a useless, ediotic, peice of cute shit.
 
New Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
831
Reaction score
0
Aesthetics count a lot to me. I prefer cute-looking Pokémon.
 
Loch Ness Monster
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
7,278
Reaction score
6
I do well with both of them since I mix my favorite pokemon with other ones that work well with them.
 
Leopard Owner
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
2,865
Reaction score
1
Aesthetics. But I will still use Pokémon tha will help me even if I don't like them much(eg: my Magcargo) but that doesn't mean I will use Pokémon I hate unless it is for lulz(eg: Raticate), or baby/unevolved Pokémon I likeif they are really useless(eg: Magby).
 
literal shrubbery
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
3,956
Reaction score
15
Functionality obviously. I'm not about to catch a bunch of cute looking pokemon just so that they can clutter my PC boxes and be worthless. Looks aren't gonna beat the elite 4, Although I usually use cute pokemon for HM slaves.
 
Unregistered User
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
932
Reaction score
1
I would never use a cute Pokemon if it sucks in battle the same way I would never use a hideous Pokemon no matter how good it is in battle.

So, both.
 
May Still Have Hope
Joined
Jun 15, 2009
Messages
1,130
Reaction score
1
Both. Current team-


Kingdra
Forretress
Swampert
Luxray
Sableye
Snorlax


The last two aren't really cool looking or cute, but they are both very good in battle. Look at Red's Snorlax! It's wicked!
 
Former Staff Artist
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
6,888
Reaction score
5
A bit of both, but I learn towards functionality. If I'm gonna have to stare at it's back for hours, it might as well look decent enough. But mostly if I'm going to use it, I want it to be useful. As for catching, I usually only catch what I need as well.

Granted I think Crobat is one of the coolest looking pokemon I have, and Ampharos is ugly as sin... but meh, I use both.
This.

I only catch something and train it if I can make some use out of it.
 
<FONT FACE=”vivaldi”>Boo.</FONT FACE>
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Messages
17,628
Reaction score
5
I mainly use Pokémon that have a higher functionality. Looks don't matter much.
 
New Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
154
Reaction score
0
Neither apply to me as i catch all pokemon to fill in my Dex, but only use the strong ones.
 
is obsessed with Noivern!
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
5,547
Reaction score
5
I go for aesthetics, most of the time, and for some reason I try to avoid pure Normal-types.

Of course, it should also be functional, but I find that the more useful ones look better anyway.
 
Man, Myth, Legend
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Messages
1,803
Reaction score
6
Aesthetics are huge for me. That's why I never evolved my Rattata in Crystal, or my Ivysaur in LeafGreen.
 
Registered User
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
29,139
Reaction score
2,355
some pokemon can be both like my Suicune im using in my Japanese Colusseum game, i always thought Suicune was beautiful, and its helped me out a lot in the game, with its water and Ice moves. Its true I do keep some pokemon around becaue i like the way I look, i didnt evolve my Chikorita in SS simply cause Chikorita is really cute and i love him, even though i know he would be stronger as a Meganum. However im willing to sacrifice cuteness, as Im eveolving my shiny Cyndaquil so it can be strong. i like the way most pokemon look anyway with a few exceptions such as Heatran which i think is dreadful looking. This has 100% to do with why im choosing to play Black version first when I get them becaue I believe Reshiram to be better looking than Zekrom, and am choosing Tsutaja as a starter because I generally think the grass starters are very good looking in general, however the the water and fire starters in my opinion are cute and adorable, Pokabu is a cute Piggy, and Mijumaru which i originally disliked is growing on me, after seeng its evolution in the anime beta art, and this is wht people like shiny pokemon cause its alla bout the looks with them, and if they have food nature/Stats and IVs its even better.
 
Last edited:
Gutes deutsches Bier
Joined
Feb 7, 2009
Messages
15,345
Reaction score
3
For an in-game team, aesthetics all the way. I will get the HM's on them some way, even if it means making Dragonite my HM bitch. I don't really care about functionality or balance on in game teams because you can just grind. Coincidentally however, the most badass looking pokemon usually end up being on the stronger side, so it usually works in my favor.

Competitive is a different story, but I don't do that anymore.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
1,395
Reaction score
6
Aesthetics are certainly important. But functionality plays an equally important role in Pokemon selection. Ive made the mistake of put aesthetics alone over functionality. Sure, my Crobat looks bad-ass, but shes not very strong. shes very fast, but her Areal Ace cant even take out a Fighting type 30 lvls lower than her.
 
The Weirdest Tower Tycoon
Joined
Sep 20, 2009
Messages
301
Reaction score
0
I perfer Aesthetics because I like to think "how can I use this pokemon successfully?"

Mono Lickilicky team FTW
I agree with your sentiments, and I raise you a 5 Kecleon + Regigigas team
 
I need to catch up!
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
1,128
Reaction score
4
I tend to use both when choosing pokemon.

Usually, I look for pokemon that I like and have functionality, although the aesthetics is just an added plus. I will go with a pokemon I don't like but has functionality if there isn't one that has both funtionality and aesthetics.

If that made any sense :sweatlol:
 
Last edited:
The Egg Mouse Pokemon. :P
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
685
Reaction score
0
Aesthetics. Which is why my team is made of the cutest or awesomest Pokemon I can find. If I can find a cute Pokemon with a sweet movepool, then it's doubly nice! As a side effect, this means that I will never ever ever evolve my Poochyenas or Turtwigs.
 
What would happen?
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
725
Reaction score
0
Lol, this completely undermines the game/anime's morals about how Pokemon are friends, not tools.

That being said, I prefer both. I'd like to SHARE my Pokemon Battles with my Poke-Friends that look great and are able to put up a good fight ;D.
 
Top