This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.
First off let me start off by saying I've started off with Pokemon Blue within the first year of its release. I've played every following Gen and have not been disappointed by a Pokemon generation yet. So I am in no way a newcomer. Maybe others on here are as baffled as me when supposed "old fans" of Pokemon's previous gens (whichever gen may be the case) bash its successor and still hang around to further perpetuate their rage or dislike with their negative comments. For instance I can't comprehend the dislike for newer Pokemon when fellow posters post things such as:
"Gen so-and-so had better Pokemon compared to these pathetic creatures Gamefreak are trying to pass off as 'mons."
"OMG Gen V Pokemon completely suck" because there's Pokemon resembling an ice cream cone, a trash bag, a chandelier and a mushroom shaped as a pokeball. "They're just running out of ideas and trying to rehash the first Gen."
Sure, Pokemon have their odd ball monsters but none of them really seem out of place after all these years. Sure there are ones I don't personally like but I don't bash an entire generation for it.
So let me ask this. What exactly constitutes a Pokemon? (In your opinion)
This topic is for both sides of the spectrum. It doesn't hurt my feelings that some people don't like Pokemon of a certain gen. I'll accept any and all Pokemon but I'm just really curious and looking for some detailed explanation. But I know I'll get some typical troll posts but hopefully if only a few will give their unbiased, logical opinion.
For me, a well designed Pokemon is based on two things: an animal and a specific idea/type of person/occupation, and these two elements are almost always unrelated to each other. Bonus points if blending those two makes a cool looking Pokemon.
http://i.imgur.com/5m6do.gif http://i.imgur.com/aEEjL.gif http://i.imgur.com/AxEds.gif
I can't define what a Pokémon is, other than...well...what I'm told by the games is a Pokémon :P
There are 654 at this point, and nobody's going to like them all, but they certainly aren't running out of ideas. We've had 'mon based on everyday objects from the very beginning. I personally dislike the vast majority of Hoenn Pokes, but that's just a matter of taste; they have a distinctively different style to the rest, especially compared to those that preceeded it. I think Garbodor is brilliant, and absolutely terrifying, ha. Don't have strong feelings towards Vanilluxe line, but don't see the big deal. Never knew Chandelure was hated, thought people loved the idea of a spectral candle / lantern :S
Official Sawsbuck of the Pokemon XY boards
[Janna, Syndra, Rumble, Fizz, Ezreal, Katarina, Volibear, Lee Sin, Kog'Maw, Wukong, Nunu, Swain]
I agree. My favorites actually come from the later gens. Syther, Scizor, heracross, feraligatr, and cyndaquil were my favs from Gen 1 and 2. 3-5 gave me much more.
Remember Senor, crafter of love.
President of the NDF Official Archeops of the Pokemon X Board
Many of my faves are from Gen 3 onwards. Salamence, Reshiram, YVELTAL, Sigilyph, Lati@s, Azelf, Swampert, Archeops, Volcarona... the list goes on. Of course I still have soft spots for older Pokemon, such as Starmie, Mewtwo, Gyarados, Scizor...
I honestly don't get this backlash against Pokémon based on inanimate objects. There has been a Mineral egg group since egg groups were introduced and GF won't quit making Pokémon for that group.
I think the likes of Claydol, Porygon and Bronzong are some of the most well-conceived Pokémon out there - more so than any random cat-dog with elemental colours that people tend to uphold as a "real" Pokémon.