• 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.

Your controversial opinions

It would be interesting to have a pair of humanoid box art legendaries for a change! I personally want to see more legendaries that have dialogue, like Calyrex.

Same but knowing some peoples, they would want to have a complex story and being able to skip the entire dialogue at the same time.
 
I know it may not be what you meant, but does Urshifu count?

Now that you mention it, Urshifu is quite humanoid and it technically counts as a box art legendary, too! And like @Sheep40 said, Calyrex is also quite humanlike in a way. There's some interesting ideas in Sword and Shield's DLC which I hope carry over into future games.
 
Yeah, I've never got to understand it, sure people have their own tastes, but then they shouldn't like starters like Blaziken or Infernape while hating on Delphox and Incineroar (without giving an actual reason aside from saying "it's furry bait") I hate those kind of peoples.
I think Blaziken and Infernape get less flak simply because they were the two first ones on the "furry-esque starter design" trend and back then it wasn't apparent that it would be a recurring thing without breaks and the Grass and Water starters they're paired with are much less anthropomorphic, so I think that's what saves them from flak. There's also the fact that Blaziken and Infernape are respectively a rooster and a monkey, animals that are already bipedal in real life. Their successors, meanwhile, are all based on quadrupedal animals, which is only going to make their sudden "four legs good, two legs better" design philosophies stick out even more, arguably to their detriment. Finally, there's the matter of burnout to consider: humanoid starters are becoming increasingly common to the point that now even the Water and Grass starters have started to get in on the trend, and the Fire-type ones in particular have been on this anthro train since Gen 3, so even if the designs are genuinely good, inevitably there's going to be a lot of people who are simply sick and tired of how samey the designs of the starters have been and are itching for something different simply to have a breath of fresh air.
 
The reasons i'm fine with Delphox is that it's Fire/Psychic (which was a breath of fresh air after nothing but Fire/Fighting starters) and it being bipedal is more conductive to what it's based on (kind of hard to use wands with paws). Plus we already had a quadrupedal fire fox and that's Ninetales.
 
Last edited:
Just an odd opinion I have...

I'd love the box art of future titles to go back fully evolved starters again instead of legendaries, And have legendaries take a back seat in the game plots themselves.

I say this because legendary-based plots are getting stale in the games - and I like it when legendaries aren't telegraphed. There's a nice sense of surprise when they appear when you don't expect them ingame, and even more a surprise when they aren't exposed in the box art.

I.e.: I wish legendaries were treated as more... "Legendary", in a way.
 
Plus we already had a quadrupedal fire fox and that's Ninetales.

Thank you for saying that, since I've been trying to say this to everyone who wanted Fennekin to stay as quadrupedal, There are also peoples hating Delphox for Having that ear fluff while loving Fennekin (I'm not trying to shame anyone's opinion but that makes zero sense for me since Fennekin already have those ear fluffs on their first stage)
 
Just an odd opinion I have...

I'd love the box art of future titles to go back fully evolved starters again instead of legendaries, And have legendaries take a back seat in the game plots themselves.

I say this because legendary-based plots are getting stale in the games - and I like it when legendaries aren't telegraphed. There's a nice sense of surprise when they appear when you don't expect them ingame, and even more a surprise when they aren't exposed in the box art.

I.e.: I wish legendaries were treated as more... "Legendary", in a way.

Putting starters on the box art again would be a nice callback to the first generation. The only problem I have, though, with starters on the box art is that it makes me feel as if I'm supposed to choose that starter myself. When I play LeafGreen, for example, I feel like I ought to choose Bulbasaur so that I can later have the game's mascot on my team.

What they could do, though, is release a solitary version with all three starters on the cover. Or they could take the Legends: Arceus route and include an assortment of non-legendary Pokemon.
 
More emphasis should be placed on regional forms instead of new Pokemon. I think that there's a lot (although hitting 1000 and stopping would be OK).
So instead of making many new Pokemon, make some (like 25~50), then after those are done, make some more regional variants of Pokemon.

Yeah no, since for me, Regional Variants aren't new Pokemon. And here is the thing

3 3-stage starter lines (9)
Regional Bug line (3)
Regional Rodent (2)
Regional Bird (2 or 3)
Regional Fish (Usually 2 stage, although Alola is the oddity that only introduced one, but it had a gimmick, but even then you can make the argument we still got 2 because of Bruxish)
Regional Feline (2 stage)
Regional Canine (2 stage)

So you are already around 18 Pokemon with those. Then we get Psuedo Legendary (3 stage), which is already 22 or 23 Pokemon (Depending on the regional bird) or 24 or 25 (Depending on the fish). Then i haven't even mentioned the mandatory Box art legendaries and a third legendary to go alongside them, as well as the event mythicals we will surely get.

Then we have the Gym leaders aces and they generally don't use the regional bird (Aside from Falkner, we don't even have an early Flying specialist in other games) and the regional rodent.

So yeah, 25/50 new Pokemon is never gonna happen and isn't even remotely realistic (You can't fill a whole region solely with them and old Pokemon, since that gets boring, really really fast) I think 60/70 new Pokemon is the minimum.
 
Last edited:
That's fair that you don't think they're new, and I mean, I'd call them somewhere between "new" and "old" as well.
However, if the regional variants have new moves, or abilities, and especially designs it could take them from feeling stale to actually being part of a region. Not every Pokemon needs a variant, but what about something like 50 new mons and 50 variants?

Way to many variants. The point about the variants thats being made is that they are somewhat special compared to their counterparts. You take that uniqueness away if you have too many of them in the same game/region in the wild. I can take around 20 variants in one game (Depending on which Pokemon gets it, since then evolution lines play a factor as well).
 
Idk, I used to think that Region forms were a cheap way of creating new "Pokemon" in SM (while also pulling the nostalgia factor since they were all Kanto mon), but I really like what OLM did in Galar (adding new evolution forms or alternative ones to already existent Pokemon), thus I'd like them to continue with such concept and maybe add new things no one expects (maybe we're about to get a fusion-sort of thing?).
 
Like everyone said, there are a lot of pokemon. If they are going to rotate rosters for every game going forward, I would like to see improvements made to the games or to some of the more often forgotten pokemon so they can have their chance in the spotlight. Like Sunkern/Sunflora. Introducing side activities like Pokethalon was a good example, where Sunkern was a good athlete. Also, I wouldn't mind seeing Sunflora with a different form and new typing if it meant it was getting more exposure.
 
All of Candice, Volkner, Aaron, Bertha and Flint's Pokemon knew at least one move of the trainer's speciality type, so the teams were still themed around those types.
All of them only have the one move, actually. And some of them are just status moves, like in the case of Volkner's Ambipom or Flint's Driftblim. I really don't think an unrelated Pokemon having one move of the relevant type can really count as sticking to a theme- otherwise, most teams would probably count as Normal-themed. Besides, if we focused on theming with moves rather than with Pokemon, gym leaders like Bugsy and Jasmine wouldn't count as their related types, because their teams only have one Bug/Steel move.
The Island Challenge isn't difficult. It had a lot of potential, especially with the uber-easy Kalos Gym Challenge still on my mind, but the execution was poor.
I don't necessarily disagree, but I don't think this is really a controversial opinion?
 
I don't necessarily disagree, but I don't think this is really a controversial opinion?
I think a lot of fans (at least on this site) have mentioned that they felt the Island Challenge was harder than they expected, and was part of the reason why they preferred them over traditional gym battles. I could absolutely be wrong in reading fandom consensus on that one, but it's just an observation I made over time.
 
I think a lot of fans (at least on this site) have mentioned that they felt the Island Challenge was harder than they expected, and was part of the reason why they preferred them over traditional gym battles. I could absolutely be wrong in reading fandom consensus on that one, but it's just an observation I made over time.

I mean Kommo-o Challenge in USUM is pretty hard If you don't overlevel or use Fairy Type mons (moves) so I think it was fairly hard.
 
It's all down to personal play style. No one can say that any given Totem (or boss or whatever else, really, at least in Pokémon) was objectively hard, because there's always going to be someone who made choices that rendered the challenge easy for them. Personally I think lots of the Totems are difficult, especially in USUM, but obviously it didn't pan out that way for everyone.

In that regard, I'm not sure that any opinion on the subject can be particularly "controversial," simply because the experience is going to be so varied across the playerbase. Maybe for the broad topic of difficulty in the series as a whole (there seems to be a consensus that Pokémon games aren't very hard, and perhaps that they used to be harder than they are now, but even then, there are different diagnoses as to why that is; also fandom is a bunch of relatively small pockets on the Internet and we're talking about a kid's game, so we're never really getting the full perspective), but individual bosses just have so many potential ways to approach them.
 
Back
Top Bottom