• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

Aesthetics vs. functionality?

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.
 
I do well with both of them since I mix my favorite pokemon with other ones that work well with them.
 
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).
 
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.
 
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.
 
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!
 
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.
 
I mainly use Pokémon that have a higher functionality. Looks don't matter much.
 
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.
 
Aesthetics are huge for me. That's why I never evolved my Rattata in Crystal, or my Ivysaur in LeafGreen.
 
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:
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.
 
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.
 
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:
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.
 
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.
 
Please note: The thread is from 14 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom