Opinions on IGN.com's Top 100 Pokemon List

[Frugrow]

This list is so highly inaccurate that it is laughable. The voting system is flawed. A fairer way to determine the top 100 would be to have a poll with all 649 Pokemon as a choice.

When I was participating in the IGN Face-off poll, I saw a particular Pokemon many time, and others, not even once. Additionally, there were many instances where the percentage for the duel was 50%. Really??? You have thousands of people voting and there were many occasions where 50% actually agreed with your selection.

 

[sannison]

lol, why can't Raichu beat the "god of Pokemon?" It's a popularity contest, not a contest of who's better.

Anyway I don't mind mostly Gen I Pokemon being in the top 50. I myself stopped playing Pokemon after RBY only to pick it back up with Black and White, so there's still a lot of Pokemon I'm not familiar with. I'm sure it's the same for a lot of people my age. We vote for Gen I Pokemon cause that's what we know.

 

[Ranger Jack Walker]

The system is flawed but I would hardly say its accurate especially when you have gamers from all genre's voting in many cases, not having played the games or only having played the first gen.

If the the top 20 consists exclusively of Gen I and a handful of Gen II Pokemon, would this honestly come as a surprise to most of us? No. Polls on fansites have mislead us to believe that all generations are liked more or less equally but the general truth is that in the eyse of the public, Gen III and later ones are laughable jokes.

 

[winstein]

It's very amazing to see Raichu rated so high! Also, I am surprised at how the commenter for Blaziken didn't like that chicken.

This list is so highly inaccurate that it is laughable. The voting system is flawed. A fairer way to determine the top 100 would be to have a poll with all 649 Pokemon as a choice.

When I was participating in the IGN Face-off poll, I saw a particular Pokemon many time, and others, not even once. Additionally, there were many instances where the percentage for the duel was 50%. Really??? You have thousands of people voting and there were many occasions where 50% actually agreed with your selection.

I believe that it is based on the ratio on the number of people voting that particular Pokemon by tally and not by the number of people that met the same matchup. What I mean is that maybe 100 people voted for Mew, 100 people voted for Mewtwo and 50 people voted for Golurk, so if you were to see Mewtwo vs Golurk and choose the latter, it will show that 33% agreed on Golurk. I think the formula is something like this:

Number of total votes of Pokemon of your choice ÷ (Number of total votes of Pokemon 1 + Number of total votes of Pokemon 2)

Thanks for reading.

 

[Ranger Jack Walker]

Audrey hasn't really said ANYTHING positive about Pokemon from later generations.

 

[Sashay]

I'm glad that Gen I/II hasn't dominated the list, but you can still see the undertone of bias.
It's relieving to know that your Gen III+ favorites still have a chance,
but you'd think IGN would get people who actually know something about pokémon to write the articles. Sheesh. It seems the writers do more bashing than the voters.

 

[TeddiUrsa]

I'm glad that Gen I/II hasn't dominated the list, but you can still see the undertone of bias.
It's relieving to know that your Gen III+ favorites still have a chance,

If your Gen III+ favourites are a starter or a legendary of those Gens of course...or a dog/cat-ish Pokémon...

This lists gets more and more boring to me. Starters, legendaries, Cat/Dog-Pokémon and Dinosaurs.
I guess the masses don't like creative ideas and just want a Gen full of Dinosaur-dogs that are either starter or legendary

Funny how the article on Aggron is all about Dragonite for some reason... ^^°

 

[Sashay]

If your Gen III+ favourites are a starter or a legendary of those Gens of course...or a dog/cat-ish Pokémon...

At least they had Milotic, I smiled at that.

Funny how the article on Aggron is all about Dragonite for some reason... ^^°

I bet that article was written by Audrey, let me check.

EDIT: It seems I was correct,

Oh Audrey ;D

 

[Grave-E]

This lists gets more and more boring to me. Starters, legendaries, Cat/Dog-Pokémon and Dinosaurs.
I guess the masses don't like creative ideas and just want a Gen full of Dinosaur-dogs that are either starter or legendary

Not that I don't like several of the 'mons included on the list but; Yeah. That's more or less how I feel when skimming through this.

I will say that I do find it pretty ironic that, over the years, I've noticed that the bulk of the 'running out of ideas' folk tend to gravitate towards a narrow selection of pokemon types not unlike the ones you described. It's irksome to see such claims with the knowledge that they, most likely, eat the same stuff up every time :/

 

[Faye Scarlet]

60) Darkrai

Darkrai made it to #60! D8 I'm so glad, that he showed up at all!

Really, there's no point complaining about bias. ._. A lot of old-school fans just have their nostalgia goggles on too tight, and refuse to acknowledge how much better designed Pokemon have become.

 

[Envoy]

60) Darkrai

Darkrai made it to #60! D8 I'm so glad, that he showed up at all!

Really, there's no point complaining about bias. ._. A lot of old-school fans just have their nostalgia goggles on too tight, and refuse to acknowledge how much better designed Pokemon have become.

Isn't this exact mentality bias in and of itself? Its the thing I was ranting about in my first post here.

No, I don't have my 'nostalgia goggles on too tight' and no, not all Pokemon have become better designed since Gen I. Gen I had some fantastically designed Pokemon, IMO (Bulbasaur, Ninetales, Squirtle, Scyther... I'd continue but the list would be too long.)

You know what? Gen V also has some fantastically designed Pokemon (Hydreigon, Ferrothorn, Serperior, Samurott... you get the point.)

Gen I has some duds (Muk, Voltorb) but so does Gen V (Garbodor, Stunfisk)

There's no such thing as 'better designed' generation of Pokemon simply because the term 'better' by its very definition is an opinion.

Have Pokemon designs become more intricate in the later generations? Yes. That's not a good thing. It's not a bad thing either. It's just a thing. I happen to enjoy a lot of the simpler designs of Gen I and Gen II. I alot happen to enjoy a lot of the more intricate designs of Gen III, IV and V. Simple =/= bad and complex =/= good or vice versa. Simple=simple and complex=complex. That's all there is to it.

Really, what is with the Generation wars? Is it that important that your faovirte 'mons get recognized by the world at large as superior designs to the ones you don't like? Can't you just be content in liking your damn favourites and moving on with your life?

Ahem, sorry for the OT rant (agian.) About the list, Pokemon I'm glad made it (though Bulbasaur and Milotic should have ranked higher

-Empleon
-Hydreigon
-Aggron
-Espeon
-Bulbasaur
-Torterra
-Blaziken
-Flygon
-Vaporeon
-Squirtle
-Wartortle
-Milotic

I also have to say that I highly disagree with the comment about Blaziken. I don't think it looked disappointing at all. In fact, I think she looks bad ass. I'm not too crazy about Combusken (the only member in the line that I don't actually like) so when mine evolved into Blaziken, it was definitely a great moment for me.

 

[Wes118]

i guess the list is good so far but i guessed pikachu would be in the top 10. i want #1 to be.......................................

Spoiler

magikarp :expect:

 

[Sashay]

I also have to say that I highly disagree with the comment about Blaziken. I don't think it looked disappointing at all. In fact, I think she looks bad ass. I'm not too crazy about Combusken (the only member in the line that I don't actually like) so when mine evolved into Blaziken, it was definitely a great moment for me.

I think the real problem is the people writing the articles, not the voters >.>

That said, I do think some of them have at least a bit of sense for it.

 

[Searing Hot Lasagna]

NUMBER 88 <33333

 

[Bulletproof Scales]

Ok. Giving this a second look I'm not too impressed...
1. The system is flawed.
2. The people writing the notes get simple information wrong/have no idea and are irrelevantly biased, really.
3. I'm reloading the page for ads. Cool. I'd prefer a list. :-/
If Magikarp hits top 10 I'm not surprised, or amused.

 

[Sashay]

The list was updated again,

Kyogre is only 25.


What?

 

[Garren]

Pretty much...

Although, interesting to see Pinsir and Tauros there...why them?
(I mean in terms of Silktree's assumed list)

 

[Sashay]

Okay, updated list:

21) Groudon
22) Typhlosion
23) Scyther
24) Raikou
25) Kyogre
26) Feraligatr
27) Lapras
28) Snorlax
29) Reshiram
30) Dragonair
31) Ninetales
32) Lucario
33) Charmeleon
34) Salamence
35) Moltres
36) Jolteon
37) Charmander
38) Garchomp
39) Giratina
40) Umbreon
41) Dialga
42) Nidoking
43) Milotic
44) Wartortle
45) Latios
46) Squirtle
47) Vaporeon
48) Pikachu
49) Flygon
50) Blaziken
51) Torterra
52) Bulbasaur
53) Espeon
54) Aerodactyl
55) Raichu
56) Haunter
57) Aggron
58) Hydreigon
59) Empoleon
60) Darkrai
61) Arceus
62) Metagross
63) Quilava
64) Kabutops
65) Haxorus
66) Sceptile
67) Pidgeot
68) Zororak
69) Swampert
70) Cyndaquil
71) Samurott
72) Kingdra
73) Houndoom
74) Serperior
75) Absol
76) Flareon
77) Kyurem
78) Ivysaur
79) Celebi
80) Steelix
81) Latias
82) Infernape
83) Electabuzz
84) Rhydon
85) Deoxys
86) Palkia
87) Meganium
88) Electivire
89) Braviary
90) Rapidash
91) Kadabra
92) Luxray
93) Growlithe
94) Machamp
95) Glaceon
96) Hitmonlee
97) Onix
98) Cubone
99) Gabite
100)Gastly

 

[SHADE 45]

Charizard's still my prediction to be #1.

I know we haven't seen him, Venusaur, Blastoise, Mew, Mewtwo, or Zekrom yet. I'm not sure who else will probably be in the top 20 though.

 

[Sashay]

Ninetales made the list, so that's cool.

but the Gen I bias is starting to show again.