PKMN.NET Forums

General Category => General Pokémon Discussion => Topic started by: Xmintnarwhalx on September 28, 2012, 03:21

Title: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Xmintnarwhalx on September 28, 2012, 03:21
Thanks for viewing feel free to comment below and for critic plz message me.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Ledyba on September 28, 2012, 12:29
Muk/Grimer.  I mean I like them, but if they had been a fourth or fith generation design, they would have been shown as a sign of pokemon's 'declining quaility' well imo anyway.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Moon Chaser on September 28, 2012, 13:27
Personally I think Luvdisc has the least creative design. It's a sideways heart with a face.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Turner on September 28, 2012, 13:31
Vanillite's evo chain, or trubbish/garbador

I understand what people say about Muk/Grimer, but at least we get detail on why they are there. In their Pokedex entries it's always explained that X-rays from the moon made contact with piles of sludge in a sewer (This is around the time we had stuff like Clefairy and it was hinted that Pokemon came from the moon) so it made more sense.

Trubbish and Vanillite haven't ever been explained. Not to mention sludge is just something that happens when certain chemicals mix...it's a lot more natural than an ice cream cone/rubbish bag with a face
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Moon Chaser on September 28, 2012, 13:36
Trubbish is explained in the White pokedex entry: The combination of garbage bags and industrial waste caused the chemical reaction that created this Pokemon.

Nothing on how Vanillite exists.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Turner on September 28, 2012, 14:21
Trubbish is explained in the White pokedex entry: The combination of garbage bags and industrial waste caused the chemical reaction that created this Pokemon.

Fair enough but that sounds like a description trying to justify the design rather than the design being born from a description/idea. I'd say that's my beef with a handful of Gen V pokemon; it's like someone designed them and then tried to come up with a story around the description instead of coming up with an idea and turning it into a Pokemon.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Moon Chaser on September 28, 2012, 14:47
I see exactly what you mean. It feels like they had the design of the Trubbish and Vanillite's line and had no idea how they would work. I don't exactly feel it's a descent explanation, but at least there is one.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: ILOVECOWS on September 30, 2012, 18:11
I say ditto. However, ditto's ability of being able to transform is pretty cool.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Liam on September 30, 2012, 20:57
Glaceon has such a lame design.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Dragonpika on October 01, 2012, 09:07
Glaceon has such a lame design.

Would you really call it the least creative though? It has one of those fluffy hats with earflaps on :3 more creative than Leafeon, which is literally just a thing with some leaves stuck to it.

(I love them both, just trying to be objective here.)

Pidove and its friends are pretty unimaginative.. Pidove especially is literally just a pigeon.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Richard and Blaziken on October 01, 2012, 09:13
It is really sad that they made vomit into a Pokemon, lit it on fire, and named it Infernape. ):

But also I think Voltorb probably gets my vote.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: MonsterMon64 on October 01, 2012, 16:51
^I wish I could say my most hated Pokemon is also the one I consider the least creative, but I actually like the concept behind Duosion and either end of its line. I just hate Duosion SO MUCH due to some personal grudges.


Anyway, this question is a tough one for me. I'd say Unown, but... I can't really back my claim up. Just the first that comes to mind when I read the question, but then I take a look at them and can't help but think I'd want plastic refrigerator magnets made out of them. <<;


Out of those listed on the poll, though... I guess Grimer and Muk, but only due to process of elimination.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Liam on October 01, 2012, 17:23
Would you really call it the least creative though? It has one of those fluffy hats with earflaps on :3 more creative than Leafeon, which is literally just a thing with some leaves stuck to it.

I just see it as a lame, blue Eevee. :p
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Mondo Oowada on October 10, 2012, 02:12
I say ditto. However, ditto's ability of being able to transform is pretty cool.
Ponder this theory.
Ditto is pink. So is Mew.
Both are the only Pokemon to learn Transform by level.
Ditto is in the Cinnabar mansion where mew was researched.
Is Ditto a failed attempt at cloning Mew?
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Gochiruzeru on October 10, 2012, 22:11
My option is not on this list... I'd say it's the entire Klink family.

First, we have Klink, which is two gears.

Then, we have Klang which is the same two gears with a third gear added on.

Then, we have Klinklang which is the same three gears with another gear and a wheel added on.

And their Japanese names makes it all even worse.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Freestyler on October 12, 2012, 20:55
I voted Voltorb and Electrode :P
They really do look like Poke Balls! With eyes. Maybe they're spies..
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Green Apple on October 20, 2012, 22:35
voltorb/electrode and luvdisc
luvdisc is a heart shaped fish. GREAT IDEA
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: SpinnelSun on October 26, 2012, 05:07
For me, Beartic is so boring. Just a bear with an icy jaw? Really underwhelming :<
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Captain Jigglypuff on November 27, 2012, 23:14
I've always believed Lickilicky was an abomination since I first saw it. Its name is SOOOOOOOOO uncreative and it's shaped like a pile of lard! It is just so fat looking! Even Snorlax doesn't look like a pile of fat and that's what its (Snorlax) body is! So I say Lickilicky is the least creative Pokemon in both name AND looks. The only thing I thought was interesting is how Lickitung must learn Rollout and then level up in order to evolve.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Clairefable on November 27, 2012, 23:30
it's shaped like a pile of lard! It is just so fat looking!

I thought that was the point... :/
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Captain Jigglypuff on November 27, 2012, 23:36
For me, Beartic is so boring. Just a bear with an icy jaw? Really underwhelming :<

I have always thought of it as having an "icicle" beard. I mean if Emboar has a beard of fire, why can't Beartice be seen with a beard of icicles?
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: mogusama on December 05, 2012, 19:02
The worst creatrive is Garbodor what the hell dude its a exploded trash bag i mean come on >:(
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: wongaman on December 06, 2012, 15:24
psyduck, its just got a big head and 3 hairs
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Gameace15 on December 09, 2012, 20:27
Personally I have to wonder why the heck is Magnemite and Magneton in a list for "least creative"? They are actually pretty creative in my opinion. I could understand if they were dull... but....
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Cobalion on December 23, 2012, 01:13
I'd say Wailord. Exactly like a whale.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: dragonite rules on December 23, 2012, 02:07
luvdisc........ nuff said
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: HipHop Honchkrow on January 02, 2013, 11:22
Trubbish & Garbardor No Doubt!
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: .~:Sly Foxx:~. on January 08, 2013, 16:23
Well, I think you have to be careful about 'Least creative'... Because... Well, creativity isn't always complexity or WTFness. Sure, you can say that Vanillice is a failed idea, but I wouldn't say it's not CREATIVE. Turning an ice cream into a pokemon doesn't strike me as unimaginative even if the execution was rather poor.

For me least creative would be something like... To take an example, Ponyta. And don't get me wrong, I still love Ponyta, and I still think the design was pulled off well. But a horse, only the mane and tail are fire. It's not exactly a difficult concept to come up with. Execution was great, and the Pokemon is much loved, but creatively there wasn't much of a challenge there.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: SirBlaziken on January 10, 2013, 01:39
It is really sad that they made vomit into a Pokemon, lit it on fire, and named it Infernape. ):

But also I think Voltorb probably gets my vote.

That is so true, I agree, voltorb also gets my vote.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Joe_Pokemon2015- MEGA RAYQUAZA! on January 10, 2013, 04:58
My option is not on this list... I'd say it's the entire Klink family.

First, we have Klink, which is two gears.

Then, we have Klang which is the same two gears with a third gear added on.

Then, we have Klinklang which is the same three gears with another gear and a wheel added on.

And their Japanese names makes it all even worse.

To be fair, the English names aren't half bad. It's a bit lame though. Imagine if it was, Klink, Klinklink, and Klinklinklink.

The Korean names are this bad too: Giareu, Gigiareu and Gigigiareu.

By the way, Foongus. We have already a Pokemon resembling a Pokeball.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: sans the skeleton on January 10, 2013, 09:36
... Chespin's not on that list? Why not? It's basically just a grass/bug type Oshawott.

EDIT: Anyway, I voted Trubbish. It's basically just a rubbish bag with what appears to be a pikachu smothered inside. Voltorb on the other hand may have just inspired the pokeball, rather than copied it.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: .~:Sly Foxx:~. on January 10, 2013, 14:28
By the way, Foongus. We have already a Pokemon resembling a Pokeball.

To be fair that was probably so they could have another 'OH HEY AN ITEM--Wait no, it's a pokemon'. I kind f like it personally, it's a fun idea XD
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Grasshole on February 11, 2013, 21:57
Grimmer is just..ugh..I don't even know..
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Joe_Pokemon2015- MEGA RAYQUAZA! on February 28, 2013, 11:17
Actually, monkey-like Pokemon and horse-like Pokemon. Any Pokemon whose designs had been overused too much.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: a username on March 27, 2013, 23:06
Why do so many people hate on Gen five and four's Pokemon designs? I can name many more, some being hitmonchan, basically a boxer, muk/grimer, piles of goo, pidgey, a bird, and caterpie, a caterpillar
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Goshdarned Sillyface on May 11, 2013, 00:20
are we forgetting about the floating rock with arms here, aka geodude? don't get me wrong, golem's pretty good but honestly geodude's just, well, what i just said basically
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Mr. Apple on May 11, 2013, 01:26
Slowpoke

What the hell is that thing??
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: LaggySoldier on June 07, 2013, 20:32
Where is Geodude?

Or Klink..

Or Exeggcute..?

They belong on this list! xD
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: I am seviper hear me hiss on July 23, 2013, 20:08
Least creative well it would be Trubbish, like who would want a piece of rubbish as a pokemon in their party? No offense Trubbish.
Title: Re: Least creative pokemon design
Post by: Golden Swing on July 30, 2013, 23:43
I would have to go with ekans, not only is his name backwards but his color palate sucks as well.