Speculation New Move/Model Animation

[Neris]

Well, for me, it doesn't make sense. It should not be called Waterfall if the intention is to climb a waterfall. It should be Water Fountain or similar terms. Anyway, I just noticed that in every generation(except for Gen 5), it all looks like water fountain to me.

Basically.

But they ran with it ever since. The Japanese name is actually Waterfall Climb, so it makes more sense in that language.

 

[SUP3RN0VA]

I think the point of that animation was supposed to be something like...the pokemon summons a fountain of ground water and then lets it fall down on the opponent, hence waterfall.

Well, if you're going to check Waterfall's animation again, the water came from the ground and it didn't fall to the opponent. I don't understand what you're pointing at. Because if I'm going to look at it in every angle, I cannot convince myself that it is a waterfall. It keeps telling me that it is a fountain, just like what you said. Haha!

I think the move Waterfall has something more to do with the Pokemon climbing up a waterfall rather than a literal waterfall cascading down on them. You see if it were actual water falling it would be a special move (Surf) not a physical one. At least I think so. So it make sense that the Pokemon using the move would strike the opponent upwards like it would climb up a waterfall. And it wasn't necessary to have Waterfall when going down on one before.

If the user will move upwards, then the name should be Water Up(just kidding) or Fountain, and not Waterfall. Because literally, if you use Waterfall(not to mention the body type of water), the water should be falling, hence, the use of the word "FALL".

On the other hand, Surf is not a big volume of water falling, its a big volume of water rushing towards the opponent, and not "falling to the opponent(literally)."

The point of water fall is to allow you to climb up waterfalls, and the battle move portrays that. Otherwise you'd have a battle move that does a different thing to what it does outside of battle.

Haha! This is getting longer. If that is your point, then why the water came from the ground and not above the opponent, if the intention of the move is to allow the poke to climb up in the waterfalls? Your statement contradicts the actual animation of the move. Also, the animation of this move in the past Gen portrays the actual waterfall(Gen V to be exact).

As the definition said, "The user charges the foe at an awesome speed"(got this from DPPt), my understanding is that the user summon a large body of water above the opponent and make the user fall together with the water with awesome speed, hence, a waterfall. But in the animation of Waterfall in X/Y, the user came from the ground. I just do not understand why the poke came from the ground if the intention is for the poke to climb in the waterfall??

My statement contradicts nothing. When you use Waterfall outside of battle, it allows you to climb UP a waterfall, therefore, when you use the move in battle, the animation depicts the pokemon going UP water. The Pokemon is SUPPOSED to go from the ground up, that's how it climbs it.

 

[BigBadButterfree]

I think the point of that animation was supposed to be something like...the pokemon summons a fountain of ground water and then lets it fall down on the opponent, hence waterfall.

Well, if you're going to check Waterfall's animation again, the water came from the ground and it didn't fall to the opponent. I don't understand what you're pointing at. Because if I'm going to look at it in every angle, I cannot convince myself that it is a waterfall. It keeps telling me that it is a fountain, just like what you said. Haha!

I think the move Waterfall has something more to do with the Pokemon climbing up a waterfall rather than a literal waterfall cascading down on them. You see if it were actual water falling it would be a special move (Surf) not a physical one. At least I think so. So it make sense that the Pokemon using the move would strike the opponent upwards like it would climb up a waterfall. And it wasn't necessary to have Waterfall when going down on one before.

If the user will move upwards, then the name should be Water Up(just kidding) or Fountain, and not Waterfall. Because literally, if you use Waterfall(not to mention the body type of water), the water should be falling, hence, the use of the word "FALL".

On the other hand, Surf is not a big volume of water falling, its a big volume of water rushing towards the opponent, and not "falling to the opponent(literally)."

The point of water fall is to allow you to climb up waterfalls, and the battle move portrays that. Otherwise you'd have a battle move that does a different thing to what it does outside of battle.

Haha! This is getting longer. If that is your point, then why the water came from the ground and not above the opponent, if the intention of the move is to allow the poke to climb up in the waterfalls? Your statement contradicts the actual animation of the move. Also, the animation of this move in the past Gen portrays the actual waterfall(Gen V to be exact).

As the definition said, "The user charges the foe at an awesome speed"(got this from DPPt), my understanding is that the user summon a large body of water above the opponent and make the user fall together with the water with awesome speed, hence, a waterfall. But in the animation of Waterfall in X/Y, the user came from the ground. I just do not understand why the poke came from the ground if the intention is for the poke to climb in the waterfall??

My statement contradicts nothing. When you use Waterfall outside of battle, it allows you to climb UP a waterfall, therefore, when you use the move in battle, the animation depicts the pokemon going UP water. The Pokemon is SUPPOSED to go from the ground up, that's how it climbs it.

Though not really canon with main series games, I would just like to bring up Squirtle's waterfall animation from super smash bros. brawl. It creates water moving in an upward direction, to allow it to climb a hypothetical waterfall.

 

[Alola]

I think the point of that animation was supposed to be something like...the pokemon summons a fountain of ground water and then lets it fall down on the opponent, hence waterfall.

Well, if you're going to check Waterfall's animation again, the water came from the ground and it didn't fall to the opponent. I don't understand what you're pointing at. Because if I'm going to look at it in every angle, I cannot convince myself that it is a waterfall. It keeps telling me that it is a fountain, just like what you said. Haha!

I think the move Waterfall has something more to do with the Pokemon climbing up a waterfall rather than a literal waterfall cascading down on them. You see if it were actual water falling it would be a special move (Surf) not a physical one. At least I think so. So it make sense that the Pokemon using the move would strike the opponent upwards like it would climb up a waterfall. And it wasn't necessary to have Waterfall when going down on one before.

If the user will move upwards, then the name should be Water Up(just kidding) or Fountain, and not Waterfall. Because literally, if you use Waterfall(not to mention the body type of water), the water should be falling, hence, the use of the word "FALL".

On the other hand, Surf is not a big volume of water falling, its a big volume of water rushing towards the opponent, and not "falling to the opponent(literally)."

The point of water fall is to allow you to climb up waterfalls, and the battle move portrays that. Otherwise you'd have a battle move that does a different thing to what it does outside of battle.

Haha! This is getting longer. If that is your point, then why the water came from the ground and not above the opponent, if the intention of the move is to allow the poke to climb up in the waterfalls? Your statement contradicts the actual animation of the move. Also, the animation of this move in the past Gen portrays the actual waterfall(Gen V to be exact).

As the definition said, "The user charges the foe at an awesome speed"(got this from DPPt), my understanding is that the user summon a large body of water above the opponent and make the user fall together with the water with awesome speed, hence, a waterfall. But in the animation of Waterfall in X/Y, the user came from the ground. I just do not understand why the poke came from the ground if the intention is for the poke to climb in the waterfall??

When you climb a waterfall, you do just that. Climb it. From the bottom up. Just like the animation used when you use the move in the field. So clearly that's what GF was going for in terms of move animation. Thus you're kind of answering your own question.

However I agree. Waterfall has always been an odd move to animate.

Well, for me, it doesn't make sense. It should not be called Waterfall if the intention is to climb a waterfall. It should be Water Fountain or similar terms. Anyway, I just noticed that in every generation(except for Gen 5), it all looks like water fountain to me.

View attachment 95980
This is a water fountain.

View attachment 95981
This is a waterfall

I'll now leave it to you which is much better animation and what animation matches the move Waterfall

But you don't climb water fountains...

And as Neris said, the move is originally called Waterfall Climb. And the localization team doesn't always reflect the Japanese version (Surprise Blow and Sucker Punch for example, or Twin Swallow Cut and Aerial Ace). The original versions of the moves give the impression that far more Pokemon can use them rather than what their English counterparts suggest (only that Pokemon with limbs can you use former and only Pokemon that can fly can use the latter).

Anyway, the flavor text for the move describes it as the user charging the opponent at an awesome speed. Thus the Pokemon conjures a Waterfall from below the opponent while simultaneously charging into it and driving it up the waterfall forcibly until they reach the top, in which the opponent falls helplessly to the ground. I don't really see what that has do with a water fountain...

 

[homer.homs]

I think the point of that animation was supposed to be something like...the pokemon summons a fountain of ground water and then lets it fall down on the opponent, hence waterfall.

Well, if you're going to check Waterfall's animation again, the water came from the ground and it didn't fall to the opponent. I don't understand what you're pointing at. Because if I'm going to look at it in every angle, I cannot convince myself that it is a waterfall. It keeps telling me that it is a fountain, just like what you said. Haha!

I think the move Waterfall has something more to do with the Pokemon climbing up a waterfall rather than a literal waterfall cascading down on them. You see if it were actual water falling it would be a special move (Surf) not a physical one. At least I think so. So it make sense that the Pokemon using the move would strike the opponent upwards like it would climb up a waterfall. And it wasn't necessary to have Waterfall when going down on one before.

If the user will move upwards, then the name should be Water Up(just kidding) or Fountain, and not Waterfall. Because literally, if you use Waterfall(not to mention the body type of water), the water should be falling, hence, the use of the word "FALL".

On the other hand, Surf is not a big volume of water falling, its a big volume of water rushing towards the opponent, and not "falling to the opponent(literally)."

The point of water fall is to allow you to climb up waterfalls, and the battle move portrays that. Otherwise you'd have a battle move that does a different thing to what it does outside of battle.

Haha! This is getting longer. If that is your point, then why the water came from the ground and not above the opponent, if the intention of the move is to allow the poke to climb up in the waterfalls? Your statement contradicts the actual animation of the move. Also, the animation of this move in the past Gen portrays the actual waterfall(Gen V to be exact).

As the definition said, "The user charges the foe at an awesome speed"(got this from DPPt), my understanding is that the user summon a large body of water above the opponent and make the user fall together with the water with awesome speed, hence, a waterfall. But in the animation of Waterfall in X/Y, the user came from the ground. I just do not understand why the poke came from the ground if the intention is for the poke to climb in the waterfall??

My statement contradicts nothing. When you use Waterfall outside of battle, it allows you to climb UP a waterfall, therefore, when you use the move in battle, the animation depicts the pokemon going UP water. The Pokemon is SUPPOSED to go from the ground up, that's how it climbs it.

I think the point of that animation was supposed to be something like...the pokemon summons a fountain of ground water and then lets it fall down on the opponent, hence waterfall.

Well, if you're going to check Waterfall's animation again, the water came from the ground and it didn't fall to the opponent. I don't understand what you're pointing at. Because if I'm going to look at it in every angle, I cannot convince myself that it is a waterfall. It keeps telling me that it is a fountain, just like what you said. Haha!

I think the move Waterfall has something more to do with the Pokemon climbing up a waterfall rather than a literal waterfall cascading down on them. You see if it were actual water falling it would be a special move (Surf) not a physical one. At least I think so. So it make sense that the Pokemon using the move would strike the opponent upwards like it would climb up a waterfall. And it wasn't necessary to have Waterfall when going down on one before.

If the user will move upwards, then the name should be Water Up(just kidding) or Fountain, and not Waterfall. Because literally, if you use Waterfall(not to mention the body type of water), the water should be falling, hence, the use of the word "FALL".

On the other hand, Surf is not a big volume of water falling, its a big volume of water rushing towards the opponent, and not "falling to the opponent(literally)."

The point of water fall is to allow you to climb up waterfalls, and the battle move portrays that. Otherwise you'd have a battle move that does a different thing to what it does outside of battle.

Haha! This is getting longer. If that is your point, then why the water came from the ground and not above the opponent, if the intention of the move is to allow the poke to climb up in the waterfalls? Your statement contradicts the actual animation of the move. Also, the animation of this move in the past Gen portrays the actual waterfall(Gen V to be exact).

As the definition said, "The user charges the foe at an awesome speed"(got this from DPPt), my understanding is that the user summon a large body of water above the opponent and make the user fall together with the water with awesome speed, hence, a waterfall. But in the animation of Waterfall in X/Y, the user came from the ground. I just do not understand why the poke came from the ground if the intention is for the poke to climb in the waterfall??

My statement contradicts nothing. When you use Waterfall outside of battle, it allows you to climb UP a waterfall, therefore, when you use the move in battle, the animation depicts the pokemon going UP water. The Pokemon is SUPPOSED to go from the ground up, that's how it climbs it.

Though not really canon with main series games, I would just like to bring up Squirtle's waterfall animation from super smash bros. brawl. It creates water moving in an upward direction, to allow it to climb a hypothetical waterfall.

I think the point of that animation was supposed to be something like...the pokemon summons a fountain of ground water and then lets it fall down on the opponent, hence waterfall.

Well, if you're going to check Waterfall's animation again, the water came from the ground and it didn't fall to the opponent. I don't understand what you're pointing at. Because if I'm going to look at it in every angle, I cannot convince myself that it is a waterfall. It keeps telling me that it is a fountain, just like what you said. Haha!

I think the move Waterfall has something more to do with the Pokemon climbing up a waterfall rather than a literal waterfall cascading down on them. You see if it were actual water falling it would be a special move (Surf) not a physical one. At least I think so. So it make sense that the Pokemon using the move would strike the opponent upwards like it would climb up a waterfall. And it wasn't necessary to have Waterfall when going down on one before.

If the user will move upwards, then the name should be Water Up(just kidding) or Fountain, and not Waterfall. Because literally, if you use Waterfall(not to mention the body type of water), the water should be falling, hence, the use of the word "FALL".

On the other hand, Surf is not a big volume of water falling, its a big volume of water rushing towards the opponent, and not "falling to the opponent(literally)."

The point of water fall is to allow you to climb up waterfalls, and the battle move portrays that. Otherwise you'd have a battle move that does a different thing to what it does outside of battle.

Haha! This is getting longer. If that is your point, then why the water came from the ground and not above the opponent, if the intention of the move is to allow the poke to climb up in the waterfalls? Your statement contradicts the actual animation of the move. Also, the animation of this move in the past Gen portrays the actual waterfall(Gen V to be exact).

As the definition said, "The user charges the foe at an awesome speed"(got this from DPPt), my understanding is that the user summon a large body of water above the opponent and make the user fall together with the water with awesome speed, hence, a waterfall. But in the animation of Waterfall in X/Y, the user came from the ground. I just do not understand why the poke came from the ground if the intention is for the poke to climb in the waterfall??

When you climb a waterfall, you do just that. Climb it. From the bottom up. Just like the animation used when you use the move in the field. So clearly that's what GF was going for in terms of move animation. Thus you're kind of answering your own question.

However I agree. Waterfall has always been an odd move to animate.

Well, for me, it doesn't make sense. It should not be called Waterfall if the intention is to climb a waterfall. It should be Water Fountain or similar terms. Anyway, I just noticed that in every generation(except for Gen 5), it all looks like water fountain to me.

View attachment 95980
This is a water fountain.

View attachment 95981
This is a waterfall

I'll now leave it to you which is much better animation and what animation matches the move Waterfall

But you don't climb water fountains...

And as Neris said, the move is originally called Waterfall Climb. And the localization team doesn't always reflect the Japanese version (Surprise Blow and Sucker Punch for example, or Twin Swallow Cut and Aerial Ace). The original versions of the moves give the impression that far more Pokemon can use them rather than what their English counterparts suggest (only that Pokemon with limbs can you use former and only Pokemon that can fly can use the latter).

Anyway, the flavor text for the move describes it as the user charging the opponent at an awesome speed. Thus the Pokemon conjures a Waterfall from below the opponent while simultaneously charging into it and driving it up the waterfall forcibly until they reach the top, in which the opponent falls helplessly to the ground. I don't really see what that has do with a water fountain...

@Akira Bond

@BigBadButterfree

I'm not referring on the animation of the move outside of the battle, I'm referring on the animation when you use it in the battle. I think, there's a misinterpretation on what I'm pointing and what you're referring to. Try watching the animation of Waterfall inside the battle.

@Hilbert

A waterfall that came from below??? That's the first time I heard of that. Because I think, the reason why a waterfall is being called waterfall is that the body of water that came from above is falling right to the bottom, not from below. Haha..but if you're referring to the water that came from below, I think the correct term for that is "water fountain", in which, the water is being executed from below.

My final conclusion is that the actual animation of Waterfall in the battle contradicts the name Waterfall. That's just for me. But if you think it contradicts on what you actually see in the animation, then feel free to express it. I now rest my case. Cheers!!

 

[Stratelier]

I watched the new Japanese trailer and among the things, I could've sworn I saw Luchador Costume Pikachu executing Flying Press. It was ... kinda funny, actually.

 

[Gard81]

I watched the new Japanese trailer and among the things, I could've sworn I saw Luchador Costume Pikachu executing Flying Press. It was ... kinda funny, actually.

Yes, every costumed Pikachu gets a different exclusive move depending on what they wear (sort of like Rotom). It's been known for quite a while, but just in case you didn't know: Luchador Pikachu has Flying Press, Rock Star Pikachu has Meteor Mash, Ph.D Pikachu has Electric Terrain, Belle Pikachu (the one in the blue dress) has Icicle Crash and Pop Star Pikachu (in the pink dress) has Draining Kiss.

 

[SUP3RN0VA]

I'm not referring on the animation of the move outside of the battle, I'm referring on the animation when you use it in the battle. I think, there's a misinterpretation on what I'm pointing and what you're referring to. Try watching the animation of Waterfall inside the battle.

I know what you meant. I was using the outside of battle use of waterfall to explain my reasoning for the battle animation. I believe Gamefreak wanted to keep them similar. They wouldn't have wanted to use the HM outside battle to climb waterfalls and then have the battle animation being a pokemon creating an actual waterfall, because that's not what the move is. The HM move is supposed to be based on a Pokemon climbing a waterfall, and that is why they did that with the battle animation.

 

[firepanda]

Incidentally, would homer.homs' post be a forum record for largest quote pyramid? All about climbing waterfalls.

 

[Ampharos King]

This week's Get TV broadcast confirms that Primal Groudon and Primal Kyogre's "signature" attacks are indeed new moves.

 

[Team Gaara]

This week's Get TV broadcast confirms that Primal Groudon and Primal Kyogre's "signature" attacks are indeed new moves.

Did anyone doubt that they were?

 

[Ampharos King]

Did anyone doubt that they were?

No, but at least with this confirmation we can safely assume that ORAS will add new moves and abilities for other Pokemon.

 

[Silktree]

No, but at least with this confirmation we can safely assume that ORAS will add new moves and abilities for other Pokemon.

Except that isn't a safe assumption, as the mascots could easily be getting special treatment. I guess that Rayquaza is a likely candidate, but even that isn't guaranteed.