De-evolution, who wants to see it?

[mineowyn]

Preventative care is key. Always wear an everstone

Yup the doctors always say prevention is always better than cure. But that sounds so wrong on so many levels.

 

[Blaze-Boy]

De-evolution.....wow that would be something funny for me. But kinda like wow at the same time.

 

[Owain]

I know I wanted a devolution back in the day when I found out what Dragonair evolves into. >>

I don't think Dragonite is ugly, not at all, but yeah, I would like it better if Dragonair evolved into a graceful majestic chinese dragon.

As for de-evolving, I'm pretty sure it would be completely pointless, as people who don't evolve their pokémon, for one reason or another, can already stop it, evolution, in the main series games has never been forced, that's not what Pokémon is about, you have all freedom of choice you want with your team, but mind, choices don't come without consequences, the games will be harder if you don't evolve your Pokémon, but evolution still isn't forced.

And besides, people would be able to do all kinds of wacky things, such as the eevee problem/branched evolution, and Infinite Shedinja.

 

[Gigatron]

While I wouldn't like de-evolution for the same reasons posted by others, I wouldn't mind seeing a sort of "gimmick" Pokémon introduced that could de-evolve as a unique quirk. Dunno how useful such a Pokémon would be in the long run, but it'd make for a nice novelty, if nothing else.

 

[CherryXCilan]

Yeah, I can see UnEvolving being an added feature into the games and anime. Some people prefer not to evolve their Pokemon or keep each evolutionary line. By adding a feature to unevolve Pokemon, this makes it easier for those who don't want to evolve their Pokemon or decided they want to unevolve a Pokemon they recently evolved.

 

[The Outrage]

Yeah, I can see UnEvolving being an added feature into the games and anime. Some people prefer not to evolve their Pokemon or keep each evolutionary line. By adding a feature to unevolve Pokemon, this makes it easier for those who don't want to evolve their Pokemon or decided they want to unevolve a Pokemon they recently evolved.

You realize the B-Button and Ever Stone already make it easy, a de-evolution does not add to that. There are very few Pokemon in which de-evolution makes sense, so I really don't see how it can be added.

Honestly, the boundary between evolution and what a form change is (in terms of the ones that can switch between formes) would be non-existent. There's also the fact that evolution requires level-up to trigger in most cases, or another item. Should we lose out on these items completely because they've been consumed? How do you evolve a level 100 that evolves by level-up? Change the trigger?

 

[CherryXCilan]

Yeah, I can see UnEvolving being an added feature into the games and anime. Some people prefer not to evolve their Pokemon or keep each evolutionary line. By adding a feature to unevolve Pokemon, this makes it easier for those who don't want to evolve their Pokemon or decided they want to unevolve a Pokemon they recently evolved.

You realize the B-Button and Ever Stone already make it easy, a de-evolution does not add to that. There are very few Pokemon in which de-evolution makes sense, so I really don't see how it can be added.

Honestly, the boundary between evolution and what a form change is (in terms of the ones that can switch between formes) would be non-existent. There's also the fact that evolution requires level-up to trigger in most cases, or another item. Should we lose out on these items completely because they've been consumed? How do you evolve a level 100 that evolves by level-up? Change the trigger?

Though your statement is accurate enough, it is not convincing in the least. Constantly pressing the "B-Button" gets annoying. Ever Stones aren't found everywhere whenever you want. Some people may want to evolve their Pokemon, but then decide they prefer the previous evolution, then they are thinking "Damn, why did I evolve this? This sucks." Oh, but guess what? They can't unevolve now, can they? Hm. How inconvenient.

 

[The Outrage]

Though your statement is accurate enough, it is not convincing in the least. Constantly pressing the "B-Button" gets annoying. Ever Stones aren't found everywhere whenever you want. Some people may want to evolve their Pokemon, but then decide they prefer the previous evolution, then they are thinking "Damn, why did I evolve this? This sucks." Oh, but guess what? They can't unevolve now, can they? Hm. How inconvenient.

You do realize, the option of de-evolution does nothing to remedy this point you made: Constantly pressing the "B-Button" gets annoying. Ever Stones aren't found everywhere whenever you want. You will still wind up doing that after de-evolution, especially for level-up ones. The solution is obvious, they need to change how they inhibit evolution.

There are very hard set rules in Pokemon regarding evolution so much that Game Freak keeps introducing random items and incense when it would simply be easier to retcon evolution styles. According to this interview, Sugimori had wanted fusions since before Gen V, yet, their introduction of fusions required a very special scenario: Three Pokemon that were originally one, coming back together. This is what differentiates Pokemon and Digimon. In Digimon games, the developers can interchange who evolves from what regardless of what had been established in the past, and even result in de-evolution. This makes sense, because they're made of data. Game Freak follows their logic and there are very few Pokemon in existence in which de-evolution could be justified.

Finally, you don't actually address any of the limitations I've pointed out in the second paragraph and simply brush it aside with "its not convincing in the least". So the Pokemon turned level 100 and you want to evolve it, but can't. What do you do then? Those hard-to-get evolution items have also been consumed, what now?

We have an entire Pokedex showing us our evolutions, and in almost all instances, it is improved battle-wise. Only a handful of evolutions actually change battle-styles between stages. Thus, the only reason left after that to not like an evolution is its appearance. It does not take very long to conclude you do not like the appearance of something, and chances are, unless its an obscure Pokemon, you'll have met its evolution earlier. If not, you can also opt to soft-reset (though that is inconvenient) or press the B-button. Again, you say its "annoying" to do so, and obviously de-evolution is the solution--however, like I pointed out, de-evolution does not solve that B-Button or everstone problem in the first place. It's just a shallow solution that glosses over a larger problem.

 

[CherryXCilan]

Though your statement is accurate enough, it is not convincing in the least. Constantly pressing the "B-Button" gets annoying. Ever Stones aren't found everywhere whenever you want. Some people may want to evolve their Pokemon, but then decide they prefer the previous evolution, then they are thinking "Damn, why did I evolve this? This sucks." Oh, but guess what? They can't unevolve now, can they? Hm. How inconvenient.

You do realize, the option of de-evolution does nothing to remedy this point you made: Constantly pressing the "B-Button" gets annoying. Ever Stones aren't found everywhere whenever you want. You will still wind up doing that after de-evolution, especially for level-up ones. The solution is obvious, they need to change how they inhibit evolution.

There are very hard set rules in Pokemon regarding evolution so much that Game Freak keeps introducing random items and incense when it would simply be easier to retcon evolution styles. According to this interview, Sugimori had wanted fusions since before Gen V, yet, their introduction of fusions required a very special scenario: Three Pokemon that were originally one, coming back together. This is what differentiates Pokemon and Digimon. In Digimon games, the developers can interchange who evolves from what regardless of what had been established in the past, and even result in de-evolution. This makes sense, because they're made of data. Game Freak follows their logic and there are very few Pokemon in existence in which de-evolution could be justified.

Finally, you don't actually address any of the limitations I've pointed out in the second paragraph and simply brush it aside with "its not convincing in the least". So the Pokemon turned level 100 and you want to evolve it, but can't. What do you do then? Those hard-to-get evolution items have also been consumed, what now?

We have an entire Pokedex showing us our evolutions, and in almost all instances, it is improved battle-wise. Only a handful of evolutions actually change battle-styles between stages. Thus, the only reason left after that to not like an evolution is its appearance. It does not take very long to conclude you do not like the appearance of something, and chances are, unless its an obscure Pokemon, you'll have met its evolution earlier. If not, you can also opt to soft-reset (though that is inconvenient) or press the B-button. Again, you say its "annoying" to do so, and obviously de-evolution is the solution--however, like I pointed out, de-evolution does not solve that B-Button or everstone problem in the first place. It's just a shallow solution that glosses over a larger problem.

Sorry, you lost me at paragraph one with such shallow points. Where are the statistics? As far as I'm concerned, a feature to unevolve Pokemon is convenient enough and whether you like it or not will probably be an added feature sometime in the near future. Come on, this is Game Freak after all.

 

[Furret162]

I think de-evolution would be useful for branched evolutions,(The Eeveelutions get huge movepool additions), but only if they kept their moves when it happened.

 

[Lansten]

I think de-evolution would be useful for branched evolutions,(The Eeveelutions get huge movepool additions), but only if they kept their moves when it happened.

That would be unfair though. A jolteon shouldn't legitimately know Psychic or Fire Blast. It would give unfair advantages.

 

[DarkLordKitten]

I see De-evolution as a plot device, possibly in relation with the regional villian team, rather then a actual game feature.

 

[Furret162]

I think de-evolution would be useful for branched evolutions,(The Eeveelutions get huge movepool additions), but only if they kept their moves when it happened.

That would be unfair though. A jolteon shouldn't legitimately know Psychic or Fire Blast. It would give unfair advantages.

It would be the only way that de-evolution would be useful, though. Otherwise, it's only a gimmick.

 

[Lansten]

I think de-evolution would be useful for branched evolutions,(The Eeveelutions get huge movepool additions), but only if they kept their moves when it happened.

That would be unfair though. A jolteon shouldn't legitimately know Psychic or Fire Blast. It would give unfair advantages.

It would be the only way that de-evolution would be useful, though. Otherwise, it's only a gimmick.

Which is kinda a problem. It would make Eevee superpowered. It also messes with stats. Where a devolved pokemon shouldn't be able to keep that stats of a fully evolved.

 

[The Outrage]

Sorry, you lost me at paragraph one with such shallow points. Where are the statistics? As far as I'm concerned, a feature to unevolve Pokemon is convenient enough and whether you like it or not will probably be an added feature sometime in the near future. Come on, this is Game Freak after all.

The statistics to what? And its really ironic that I lost you at paragraph one with "shallow points" when paragraph one consisted of me reiterating your points. I'm not exactly sure what these statistics you're asking for is, but you don't need a statistical analysis (and indeed, it would be an inappropriate tool) to realize that implementing de-evolution does not remedy the fact that you'll still need to either attach an Everstone to prevent them from evolving again once de-evolved, or continue pressing the B-Button.

And you're calling my responses shallow when all you've been doing is brushing any criticism to your point aside, and using empty statements like "come one its Game Freak" which really have no meaning to them. Yes, its Game Freak, and had you bothered reading the rest of my post, you'd see that "its Game Freak" doesn't really work towards your argument that they'll just randomly add in the feature without reasonable explanation given the lengths Game Freak goes to in order for us to accept things like Pokemon fusions.

Then there's also the many other issues people brought up that have to be dealt with, and saying "As far as I'm concerned, its more convenient" isn't a legitimate argument, because as far as any single person is concerned, their opinions can differ. The problems they'd have to overcome is this:

- Incompatible moves: This one is easy enough, they do it with B/W Kyurem already forcing them to forget moves when they revert. Either that, or in the case of branch evolutions, let them keep their moves, therefore possibly allowing players to take the one useful thing one branch has and give it to their otherwise more superior counterpart (i.e., the balance Game Freak creates between the two being broken)
- Permanent loss of evolution items: So now Game Freak has to decide whether or not de-evolution somehow re-materializes the items consumed
- De-evolution at level 100: Sure, you now have the option to change your mind if you didn't like an evolution, but now you'll have to figure out how to remedy a scenario in which a person wishes to evolve a level 100 Pokemon whose only trigger is leveling up, given that this trigger has been lost

Next, there are the inherent problems that de-evolution doesn't fix in the first place:

- B-Button: You will still need to keep using the B-button even after you de-evolve to maintain the lower stage if your trigger is simply "leveling up"
- Everstone: Limited quantities aside (though hardly limited), you're still forced to make your Pokemon hold an item when you may prefer that they hold something else

These two points are ones you seem to imply are also solved by de-evolution, and the ones you fail to address because apparently, my pointing them out in the first paragraph is "shallow" while your "come on, its Game Freak" type points aren't.