New Pokémon Discussion

[Green Zubat]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

Wow, that sure was a big knowledge bomb they dropped on us there the leaks, the rumours etc.

As far as confirmed pokemon go, I'm liking how this new batch is shaping up. I mean, I don't like every one of them, but that's to be expected. My faves atm are (in descending order): Desukan, Denchura & Mebukijika, Tamagetake, Hiyappu, Baffuron, Mijumaru & co and Basurao (Blue-stripe).

I was really pleased with Desukan's front sprite, not over-complicated as I feared it would be and its Mummy ability is cool too. Still, I think Desukan might've been better suited with a second type such as Rock, Steel or even ground but w/e. Denchura's front sprite is also awesome IMO and it too has very nice abilities - especially compoundeyes - and a good typing (only two weaknesses).

I like Tamagetake because its just so cute and I'm glad they gave it effect spore, a useful ability. I'm wondering though, is it possible it evolves from Tauros? I mean, I wouldn't be complaining but I don't think Tauros really needs an evo. Luvdisc, on the other hand, is dying for one. More literally than not.

 

[dman_dustin]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

Perhaps this has been mentioned before, but how about an alternative theory to the Journey of the west for the fire fighting types which someone said didn't have a chicken Pokemon.

What about the Chinese Zodiac? Rooster, Monkey, Pig?

I know Infernape is definitely heavily based on the journey to the west. But even so there is the possibility of the Chinese Zodiac to think about.

 

[V Faction]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

That's fine for some people, but not for me.

I personally believe the starters are self-contained and do not adhere to any type of story or legend. They are created within a vacuum without regards to other Pokemon or even other starters. You could probably make an argument that the specific animals used are being pulled from a reliable source just like you could claim that all Grass starters are reptilian in nature, but it's all still guess work.

 

[dman_dustin]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I personally believe the starters are self-contained and do not adhere to any type of story or legend. They are created within a vacuum without regards to other Pokemon or even other starters. You could probably make an argument that the specific animals used are being pulled from a reliable source just like you could claim that all Grass starters are reptilian in nature, but it's all still guess work.

I would believe that but we have a third fire/fighting starter line; not to mention they've been a row. As well as you bringing up the grass starter reptilians (but at least 2 of them have been dual typed).

Does Gamefreak forget things too easily?

3rd Gen- Executive: Alright the fire type starter, hmm maybe part fighting, yes perfect.

4th Gen- Executive: So the fire type starter, Oh I know, a fighting type.

5th gen- Executive: Now onto the fire type starter. Wait, you know what type we've never had with fire before. That's right, fighting.

Nor do I think Gamefreak is just out of ideas.

 

[AshleeK]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I would believe that but we have a third fire/fighting starter line; not to mention they've been a row. As well as you bringing up the grass starter reptilians (but at least 2 of them have been dual typed).

Does Gamefreak forget things too easily?

3rd Gen- Executive: Alright the fire type starter, hmm maybe part fighting, yes perfect.

4th Gen- Executive: So the fire type starter, Oh I know, a fighting type.

5th gen- Executive: Now onto the fire type starter. Wait, you know what type we've never had with fire before. That's right, fighting.

Nor do I think Gamefreak is just out of ideas.

I know what you mean - the fire starters are completely uninspired, but most of the new Pokemon for this gen are brilliant so Gamefreak is not out of ideas just yet. Just wish that they'd pass on some of these original ideas to the fire starters for once.

 

[Sanic Hegehog]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I think the main excuse for Fire/Fighting is that Stab Fighting moves work wonders against the first gym leader (Aka Rock type gym leader). However, this is not the case this generation.

 

[V Faction]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I think the main excuse for Fire/Fighting is that Stab Fighting moves work wonders against the first gym leader (Aka Rock type gym leader). However, this is not the case this generation.

Uh, the second Gym is EXACTLY that -- Weak to Fighting.

So I don't think it's a good arguement/excuse.

 

[Ampharos King]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I think the main excuse for Fire/Fighting is that Stab Fighting moves work wonders against the first gym leader (Aka Rock type gym leader). However, this is not the case this generation.

No, the "main excuse" is that Pokabu's evolutionary line seems to derive from the Journey of the West tale (same with Chimchar's last gen). Being related to martial arts means that Pokabu's evos have to be Fighting to fit the theme.

Aloe is a normal-type gym leader. Normal pokemon only have one weakness - fighting-type moves, which is precisely what Pokabu will learn once it evolves.

Anyways, typing is very inconsequential. Even if you picked Tsutarja and Mijumaru, their attacks will still inflict normal damage.

 

[Zeta]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I think the main excuse for Fire/Fighting is that Stab Fighting moves work wonders against the first gym leader (Aka Rock type gym leader). However, this is not the case this generation.

Uh, the second Gym is EXACTLY that -- Weak to Fighting.

So I don't think it's a good arguement/excuse.

Actually, that's not a bad argument.

The problem seems to be that Rock and Ground types are common in most early games of Pokemon for enemies to use. Water and Ground stomp on them but fire hits a brick wall - literally.

In the Gen III remakes, for instance, they gave Charmander every single offensive steel move to try to make up for this.

Perhaps they've just resigned themselves to having to do this to make up for Fire's offensive weaknesses?

 

[dman_dustin]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

Uh, the second Gym is EXACTLY that -- Weak to Fighting.

So I don't think it's a good arguement/excuse.

But, Aloe is a normal type Pokemon gym leader. Both Grass and Water were superior to rock types so being part Fighting type gave fire types the advantage.

But everyone would be neutral against Aloe (well except now since Choabuu is apparently is strong against her Pokemon). So I'm not sure this gen makes sense to give Chaobuu fighting type when it's on par with Grass and Water this gen.

And if something had to be super effective against Aloe. Futachimaru being part fighting would've made a lot more sense.

Edit: Plus I don't see what's wrong with bug or grass being first when none of starting areas are even remotely sandy or rocky. Oreburgh City was rocky (but it wasn't near the starting area), but I don't think Roxanne's type made any sense since Rustboro City was completely covered by grass and forest.

 

[V Faction]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

It's just like you say, in Gen III they gave Charmander Metal Claw to help a bit with the first Gym.

And yet, the first Gym in these games specifically target the weakness of your starter. So you'll be at a disadvantage anyway.

As for the second Gym, a regular move would've settled the whole weakness thing. Even Mijumaru gets Revenge, and Normal types aren't strong against anything. So why go give Pokabu's evo the Fighting-type for that sole reason? It doesn't add up.

That's why I don't buy the whole Gym arguments. Gyms are also one-time use. Their impact on designing Pokemon is rather small in my opinion. In my eyes, they clearly went ahead and designed Chaobuu the way they did intetionally and without regards to the outside forces.

 

[rbogey]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I would believe that but we have a third fire/fighting starter line; not to mention they've been a row. As well as you bringing up the grass starter reptilians (but at least 2 of them have been dual typed).

Does Gamefreak forget things too easily?

3rd Gen- Executive: Alright the fire type starter, hmm maybe part fighting, yes perfect.

4th Gen- Executive: So the fire type starter, Oh I know, a fighting type.

5th gen- Executive: Now onto the fire type starter. Wait, you know what type we've never had with fire before. That's right, fighting.

Nor do I think Gamefreak is just out of ideas.

I think what happens is that they design the Pokemon and come up with the type based on what it looks like. Honestly, when I saw the Pokabu evolutions (maybe) I did think of a Fighting type.

 

[dman_dustin]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I think what happens is that they design the Pokemon and come up with the type based on what it looks like. Honestly, when I saw the Pokabu evolutions (maybe) I did think of a Fighting type.

Chaobuu, I would agree.

Ganonbuu, no way in hell does it remotely look fighting over dark.

Besides didn't that Pokemon Pia interview or something say that an executive tell the designer a type, and they then create the Pokemon.

Because quite frankly I can't see the Pokemon coming first, maybe the Pokemon and typing are thought of at the same time. But I don't think they would design a Pokemon and then figure out its type later. I mean seriously Pokabu looks like a bandit (it looks like it could be a dark type but since it is a basic stage it wouldn't be), Ganonbuu looks like a demon pig creature (dark type), and suddenly someone slapped in wrestler Chaobuu and it became a fighting type, doesn't work for me. The typing had to have been before the Pokemon, and the designer trolled the fandom by making it look like it would be a dark type.

Now if I had to think of anything Ganonbuu looks like a fighting type it might be the soldier like appearance, but it doesn't exactly look like something that would be friendly. It definitely looks like it would be Ganon's Pokemon if the Zelda franchise and Pokemon were to combine.

 

[Ayrrow]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

Do we reckon that the final evolutions will also gain typings for grass & water? Similar to how Empoleon got /Steel?

But fire/fighting? seriously? 15 other types and we get Fire/Fighting yet again?

 

[Ivysaur]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

Do we reckon that the final evolutions will also gain typings for grass & water? Similar to how Empoleon got /Steel?

It's confirmed they remain purely Grass and Water. Unfortunately.

But fire/fighting? seriously? 15 other types and we get Fire/Fighting yet again?

GameFreak is trolling us. It's really the only possible explanation.

 

[Eitarou]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

I highly doubt a starter will ever have a water or grass added to them so It's 13 really..

 

[Ayrrow]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

you get the point....

And has it been confirmed? Stupid Gamefreak... Oh well, I love every other pokémon... can't have everything...

 

[Dr. GM]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

Oye! Ese toro tiene bastante cabello!

 

[Ivysaur]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

Oye! Ese toro tiene bastante cabello!

...this something has a lot of hair?

 

[Casual Cnidarian]

Re: Confirmed New Pokémon Discussion

...this something has a lot of hair?

The bull has enough hair...?