This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Only 69 Pokemons this generation, smart move or bad move?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon X
  3. Only 69 Pokemons this generation, smart move or bad move?

User Info: RollerBob

3 years ago#1
Less Pokemons this gen: smart move or bad move? - Results (201 votes)
Smart Move
68.16% (137 votes)
Bad Move
31.84% (64 votes)
This poll is now closed.
Now, now, I'm not here to start a war or anything, just to hear some civilized feedback from the community about this aspect of the game... s.

- Gen 1 started with 151 Pokémons
- Gen 2 added 100 more
- Gen 3 added 135 more
- Gen 4 added 107 more
- Gen 5 added 156 more
- Gen 6 added 69 more

This generation added the least number of new Pokémon as of today. I'd like to know from you if adding less critters was a bad move from Nintendo and GameFreaks or a smart move.

It's true that the Mega Evolutions are new, but I feel like I can't categorize them with the entirely new critters; they are part of a separate group. Let me explain my statement. For me, I feel like adding less Pokémons was a rather bad move.

- What is the fun part in the Pokémon series? Training Pokémons, but it all starts with capturing them and then evolving them. My first issue with the decreased number is that... you can "catch'em all" pretty quickly. There are less new Pokémon to encounter and catch. If you're new to the series, that will never bother you, because you can catch the Pokémon from previous generations. However, if you're a veteran, you might have thought of transfering your Pokémons from one series to the next, leaving you to catch only the new ones as you journey on. Considering that not a lot of them are present in the wild, capturing may have become less frequent.

- Yes, cool Pokémon designs often help you decide your team. However, the Pokémon has to be good before looking good. It's true that less Pokémon might have been a safe bet so they don't run out of ideas. However, considering the possibilities of inspirations in addition of dual-typing, I'd say that they might never run out of ideas for new Pokémons. This is my 2nd reason why I think it was a bad move: I feel like they could have taken unused dual-type combos to create more new Pokémons. The list of unused combos is pretty long, but combos like Dark/Electric, Ghost/Fighting, Water/Fire and Dragon/Grass could stir up the competition as well as the idea mill.

- 3rd reason: some Pokémons could have gotten new evolutions. To me, raising a Pokémon that doesn't evolve at all is boring. Where's the payoff? Moves, stats, abilities? I honestly think that nothing is more satisfying than having your Pokémon evolve. Mega Evolutions... kinda bursted my bubble, because some of them could have been used for Pokémon which didn't have evolutions before, like Pinsir or Mawile. This gen offers... Sylveon... only... You know when Gen 2 was announced with Scizor, Pichu, Slowking and Blissey, or Gen 4 with Weavile, Magnezone and Magmortar? Well, I wished that more Pokémons this gen, especially for an even one, would have granted some Pokémons with evolutions or even pre-evolutions. This would have incited players to train some Pokémons for more than just collection.

- 4th and final reason: The Fairy type, while good, could have been expanded more. Ok, yes, Steel and Dark didn't start with many species in Gen 2, like around 6 each, but back then, the series was still in its infancy, meaning they had to test the type more carefully. Today, Pokémon is now a beast of the series with I believe more confident. Fairies could have been more numerous to this gen. True, they made some previous Pokémon fairies, but to get back to the 2nd point, they could have gone with more of them, especially since feys are extremely numerous in folklores. Finally, the Fairy type might have gotten more moves if more of them would have been added.

TL;DR I am NOT hating the new Pokémons, ok? I'm just saying that I hate their low number because they kinda ruins the catching, the concept for new Pokémon with new dual types, the possible upgrades and the introduction of a new type. That's why I say it's a bad move.

That's just me though, what about you?
Yes, I'm Canadian. Yes, I speak french. Yes, I live in Quebec.

User Info: CaptainKatsura

3 years ago#2
New Pokemon will be paid DLC.
Herp-a derp

User Info: shruikan3225

3 years ago#3
Quality over quantity for me. I like hed how 2 and 6 had new pokemon but there were enough older pokemon so that it still felt familiar. At least the flying pokemon this gen were fire type too.

User Info: AngelPeach

3 years ago#4
Personally, I think the low amount is a smart move. It gives more of a reason to mix the old with the new, which isn't a bad thing. Sure there may not be a lot added, but I don't have a problem with it.

Another reason I think it is a smart move is how many Pokémon there are currently. It was only 649 when it was back in the fifth gen, but now, it is 718. That's quite a lot. I'm not saying the amount was made them not add as much, but I do think 718 is quite a lot of Pokémon. I mean, really, do we really need over a hundred or so and make the count more like 750 or closer to 800?

I'm not saying that people can't hate a low amount of new Pokémon, but considering there was so many before generation 6, I can accept that there isn't many new Pokémon.

User Info: gatz900

3 years ago#5
bad move only because there is what, 3 OU viable pokemon this generation? really wish they had more pokemons for types that are badly needed
3DS FC: 1821-9521-7577 ign space
Pokemon bw2 fc: 1378 9885 3064

User Info: Firelion6593

3 years ago#6
It's a smart move, as it allows them to extend Pokemon's overall lifetime without adding too many Pokemon overall. Let's face it, 718 is a lot of Pokemon to keep track of.
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.

User Info: Totor999

3 years ago#7
Meh, you people always see things in black and white.

How about an "okay-but-could've-been-better-move" choice?

Or just a "meh", or a "I don't mind"?

Not everyone is going to either praise or hate that relatively low number of new Pokémons.
Science knows it doesn't know everything. Otherwise it'd stop.
-Dara O'Briain

User Info: Golurkcanfly

3 years ago#8
The low amount is a smart choice because it allowed GF more time to refine other mechanics.
Official Amnesiac Darkrai of the Pokemon X Board
You know why spiders know how to spin webs when they hatch? Because F*** You! That's why.

User Info: Kromlech06

3 years ago#9
CaptainKatsura posted...
New Pokemon will be paid DLC.

“[..]In terms of DLC specifically, I don’t know what shape DLC can take in the future. But at the moment I don’t feel it’s a safe enough mode – so to speak – appropriate for Pokémon.

There’s no download content or microtransaction content developed specifically for Pokémon X & Y. We’ve not come up with any ideas on that yet. I like the idea that Pokémon can be enjoyed with just one piece of software. You buy the game and it can be enjoyed just with that one software that you buy. That’s a key point for Game Freak.”

– Junichi Masuda
3DS FC: 2277-6801-3957
PM and I'll add you too. You know you want Water Absorb Maractus.

User Info: Robot_Soopa

3 years ago#10
Bad Move.

Mega Evolutions shouldn't exist and we should have just gotten more new Pokemon.
FC: 1590 - 5604 - 5229
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon X
  3. Only 69 Pokemons this generation, smart move or bad move?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived