Legendary Pokemon Speculation

[Lunala]

I'm willing to allow perhaps one may be a wolf. Two wolves is excessive.

For those who like wolves, isn't one wolf good enough? Is it really necessary for both to be wolves?

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

I'm willing to allow perhaps one may be a wolf. Two wolves is excessive.

For those who like wolves, isn't one wolf good enough? Is it really necessary for both to be wolves?

The entire reason for the two wolves theory is that the symbol on the two version logos is identical.

People didn’t come up with the 2 wolves idea out of nowhere.

 

[BigBadButterfree]

I'm willing to allow perhaps one may be a wolf. Two wolves is excessive.

For those who like wolves, isn't one wolf good enough? Is it really necessary for both to be wolves?

While I personally don't think they'll be wolves (I'm of the camp that thinks it's a symbolic wolf), you could technically also similarly ask "is 8 dragons really necessary?"

Gens 6 and 7 we're great with their box legends, they were different and cool and broke away from the "dragon is legend type" formula.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

Gens 6 and 7 we're great with their box legends, they were different and cool and broke away from the "dragon is legend type" formula.

They failed to resist with the third legend though. I hope this generation has a dragon-less third legend (if any).

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

There are so many Dragon type legendaries for a reason

The reason is they are cool af

We’ve had enough of dragon cool.

We need wolf cool now They're majestic af

Anyways, the argument that 'Both wolf legends don’t appeal to people who don’t like wolves and it doesn’t make marketing sense' falls apart when you realise that two generations in a row had nothing for people who didn’t like elaborate dragons at all but it still happened.

 

[Boss1708]

To me your claims sound like "Ewww Game Freak, stop designing all these cool, badass Dragon Pokémon!" Dragon haters are contrarians and have shit taste.

(I am obviously joking. I respect you, wolf fans )

 

[Lunala]

Anyways, the argument that 'Both wolf legends don’t appeal to people who don’t like wolves and it doesn’t make marketing sense' falls apart when you realise that two generations in a row had nothing for people who didn’t like elaborate dragons at all but it still happened.

Which hasn't happened since gen 5.

 

[BigBadButterfree]

To me your claims sound like "Ewww Game Freak, stop designing all these cool, badass Dragon Pokémon!" Dragon haters are contrarians and have shit taste.

(I am obviously joking. I respect you, wolf fans )

Lol I can't speak for anyone else here but I'm not a dragon fan OR a wolf fan. I am, however, a fan of diversity.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

Which hasn't happened since gen 5.

If the themes call for it they can go back to two similar legends though.

The logos are the most solid thing we have to speculate about legends yet, since most recent logos have held a reference to the box mascots in some way.

 

[Boss1708]

Lol I can't speak for anyone else here but I'm not a dragon fan OR a wolf fan. I am, however, a fan of diversity.

I respect that.

Personally, I am not a fan of diversity. I am a fan of quality.

Diversity can be good or bad, depending of its quality. Diversity for the sake of diversity is usually a bad decision (both in Pokémon, politics and elsewhere).

But I will give Game Freak a chance, of course.

 

[Beer&Nyquil]

dragon is my favorite type but I would definitely like some more variety in terms of legends. give me dragon non-legends instead imo

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

I respect that.

Personally, I am not a fan of diversity. I am a fan of quality.

Diversity can be good or bad, depending of the quality. Diversity for the sake of diversity is usually a bad decision (both in Pokémon and elsewhere).

But I will give Game Freak a chance, of course.

Not all dragon legends are quality in everyone’s opinion though. I could do without Palkia, Black Kyurem, Giratina-altered and Zygarde-Complete.

The Sinnoh trio in particular was a bit awkward, which mostly failed in both diversity and quality for me. (I’ve written this sentence after forcefully taking off nostalgia glasses).

At least one generation without dragons will not hurt anyone as Dragon-lovers have had 5 generations worth of dragon legends and almost the entire pseudo legendary section.

 

[Jolty94]

I'm hoping that the wolves in the logos are the potential 3rd legendary like others have been saying and that they put their all into these two games, with a potential "delta episode" style of post game story for the 3rd legendary so that we don't get ANY 3rd version (I'm ok with sequels like BW2 but please, USUM reverted back to a 3rd version formula I couldn't stand), but spread out so that it can at least give you another maybe 5-10 hours of playtime after completing the main game.

Didn't personally like the Wooden Horse and Metal Snake rumours (can't remember if they were confirmed fake or w/e), but a unicorn I am HERE FOR.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

I'm hoping that the wolves in the logos are the potential 3rd legendary like others have been saying and that they put their all into these two games, with a potential "delta episode" style of post game story for the 3rd legendary so that we don't get ANY 3rd version (I'm ok with sequels like BW2 but please, USUM reverted back to a 3rd version formula I couldn't stand), but spread out so that it can at least give you another maybe 5-10 hours of playtime after completing the main game.

Didn't personally like the Wooden Horse and Metal Snake rumours (can't remember if they were confirmed fake or w/e), but a unicorn I am HERE FOR.

Even if sequels were done, I’d prefer if it were released as a DLC expansion instead of a new release.

 

[BigBadButterfree]

I respect that.

Personally, I am not a fan of diversity. I am a fan of quality.

Diversity can be good or bad, depending of the quality. Diversity for the sake of diversity is usually a bad decision (both in Pokémon and elsewhere).

But I will give Game Freak a chance, of course.

I think one thing to keep in mind is that "bad" in this context is subjective. I respect those that like the long lineup of gen 4 and 5 dragons, but you can't say their designs are objectively better than something that isn't a dragon (I'm not putting words in your mouth, that's the hypothetical/collective "you").

For instance, the first box legend we got after all those dragons. A big rainbow deer might not be your thing. But my friend, who had just recently gotten into Pokemon, loved it. It remains her favorite legendary design still.

That's why I value diversity, even if you (or me, or anyone) considers a design sub-par. Somebody somewhere probably really likes that design, and isn't it better for everyone to get something that they like, rather than to just appeal to one type of person indefinitely?

Bah, I'm sounding really preachy. That's not my intent. Like dragons. Like wolves. Like magic rocks that take over lions. You do you, but don't cut down a design so quickly because someone else probably really likes it.

 

[Boss1708]

Not all dragon legends are quality in everyone’s opinion though. I could do without Palkia, Black Kyurem, Giratina-altered and Zygarde-Complete.

The Sinnoh trio in particular was a bit awkward, which mostly failed in both diversity and quality for me. (I’ve written this sentence after forcefully taking off nostalgia glasses).

At least one generation without dragons will not hurt anyone as Dragon-lovers have had 5 generations worth of dragon legends and almost the entire pseudo legendary section.

I agree. I never said all Dragon Legendary Pokémon were great designs.

 

[Jolty94]

Even if sequels were done, I’d prefer if it were released as a DLC expansion instead of a new release.

Yes this 100%! I would prefer that too, it would mean greater things for main series games in the future as well.

 

[Boss1708]

I think one thing to keep in mind is that "bad" in this context is subjective. I respect those that like the long lineup of gen 4 and 5 dragons, but you can't say their designs are objectively better than something that isn't a dragon (I'm not putting words in your mouth, that's the hypothetical/collective "you").

For instance, the first box legend we got after all those dragons. A big rainbow deer might not be your thing. But my friend, who had just recently gotten into Pokemon, loved it. It remains her favorite legendary design still.

That's why I value diversity, even if you (or me, or anyone) considers a design sub-par. Somebody somewhere probably really likes that design, and isn't it better for everyone to get something that they like, rather than to just appeal to one type of person indefinitely?

Bah, I'm sounding really preachy. That's not my intent. Like dragons. Like wolves. Like magic rocks that take over lions. You do you, but don't cut down a design so quickly because someone else probably really likes it.

Tbh, I just don't like the "diversity" cliché. I was talking about "diversity" in general, not of Pokémon designs in particular (There are shitty Dragon legendaries out there, I know).

Quality + Diversity is a great combo.

Only diversity for the sake of diversity? No thanks.

 

[PkmnTrainerV]

I agree. I never said all Dragon Legendary Pokémon were great designs.

Was just saying that just like diversity didn’t mean quality in your opinion, non-diversity does not ensure quality too.

Diversity ensures that everyone likes atleast something.

 

[Boss1708]

"Diversity ensures that everyone likes atleast something."

Ok, that's factually incorrect.