Poll

Which out of the following do you think are the worst/laziest pokemon designs?

Magneton, Dugtrio, Klinklang
Baby pokemon
Stunfisk
Voltorb, Electrode
Muk, Garbodor
Honourable mentions
Not a pokemon mentioned above

Author Topic: Terrible Pokemon ideas  (Read 3358 times)

0 Members, Big Brother and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Richard and Blaziken

  • Name Rater Hater
  • *****
  • Posts: 6376
  • Gender: Male
  • Mr. Blaziken
    • View Profile
    • dA
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2013, 13:06 »
I agree with Paul, except in the case of monkeys, and only because holy hell did we get a lot of them, even in gen 5 alone. 6 elemental monkeys, and Darmanitan is an orangutan/Donkey Kong Ball, and before that we had Mankey/Primeape, Aipom/Ambipom and the Inderpape line, bringing us 15 different monkeys. Holy hell, we don't even have that many butterflies!

I wouldn't say they're unoriginal, though. They're all pretty different, though the amount of fire monkeys baffles me a bit, but it's just something worth noting, maybe? Only Hoenn brought us a monkey-free land... I wanna go back.

quack98

  • Guest
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #16 on: June 29, 2013, 13:25 »
About the monkeys, does the Slaking line count? (I'm pretty sure he's a Gorilla, but ya never know ;D!)

MonsterMon64

  • Guest
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #17 on: June 29, 2013, 13:35 »
Slaking is the closest we have to a straight-up gorilla.... and Vigoroth sort of reminds me of a sloth crossed with one of those mountain hot-spring monkeys... I don't think the Pokemon world will ever have a shortage of primate power, haha.

Offline Richard and Blaziken

  • Name Rater Hater
  • *****
  • Posts: 6376
  • Gender: Male
  • Mr. Blaziken
    • View Profile
    • dA
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2013, 01:16 »
...Damn it, they got Hoenn ;-; (I completely forgot about that line haha whoops)

Offline Utack and Swampy

  • "Generally, anything in the 31-28 range is fantastic, 27-24 is ok, 23-lower is no."
  • Fan Fan
  • *****
  • Posts: 10222
  • Gender: Male
  • Smooth as a Silcoon~
    • View Profile
    • My Art
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #19 on: June 30, 2013, 03:34 »
...Why has no one mentioned Superdesukawaiieon yet?

Those bow's and ribbions aren't removable folks, they're large growths of asymmetrical flesh.


Thank's to Blake... for the awesome sig!

Offline Joe_Pokemon2015- MEGA RAYQUAZA!

  • Gen. Giratina: Leader of the Pokemon International Movement. Ternyata semuanya lupa negera Korea...
  • Joeno Fan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2385
  • Gender: Male
  • Giratina: Giygogagohgwooh! to QC for this avatar
    • View Profile
    • Check out my deviantART page! It has Pokemon!
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #20 on: July 01, 2013, 09:30 »
So all it takes is to make another of the same or similar species and suddenly it's a bad idea? Doesn't matter what type it is, how it plays or anything like that?

Yes. Take the monkey example. How many Pokémon based on monkeys are there? I mean, people are complaining about simple gears and magnets and all they thought is, "unoriginal".

Never mind, people like monkeys. They always will.

MonsterMon64

  • Guest
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #21 on: July 01, 2013, 19:16 »
Alright, fair's fair (not even arguing against the monkeys at this point anyway) but now that I think of it, nobody seems to be complaining about the amount of Water-type fish we have, let alone Water-types in general. Probably the only defense I have at this point is that in real life, there is more than one species of animal, so I see no problem in having more than one of the same/similar species of Pokemon. Personally, I'd rather have more to choose from than less.

(on a side note, I hope Froakie gets an interesting secondary typing. Anything but pure Water by this point, people have already complained we already have three lines of frogs anyway and only Croagunk and Toxicroak aren't part Water)

quack98

  • Guest
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2013, 21:06 »
I don't think people tend to care about water type fish, because the most well known sea creatures (certainly from a child's POV) is a fish, and a lot of the fish aren't just plain fish:

Magikarp turns into leviathan thing
Feebas into whatever milotic is
Lumineon is a luminescent neon fish thing

You get the point. I agree they probably do need to try other sea creatures (Squids, Hammerhead, Shrimp), but I can sort of sea ( ;D) why there's so many fish.

Offline Clairefable

  • worst jobby
  • Joeno Fan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1080
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
    • abandon hope all ye who enter here
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #23 on: July 01, 2013, 21:45 »
This topic has made me realise that there aren't any pokemon that I think of as "bad". There are certainly pokemon that I think are as ugly as sin (Timburr line I'm looking at you) but I think that's just a matter of my personal taste, rather than them being "terrible ideas". Then again Vanilluxe is like my favourite 5th gen pokemon so what do I know.

Offline Hoof Hearted

  • Rob Fan
  • *****
  • Posts: 69
  • Gender: Male
  • Swampert is nnniccee
    • View Profile
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #24 on: July 06, 2013, 01:12 »
There are no terrible pokemon ideas. Why be so negative? You're only limiting yourself. It has taken at least a degree of originality and creativity to create each.
You clearly didn't pay attention to the numerous times I said that this was "my opinion". Your opinion is that there are no bad pokemon, mine is that there are. Even if it took them a huge amount of time to make a pile of sludge, a pile of trash, or even an upside down pokeball, my opinion is that they're just lazy and bad pokemon designs. We all have different opinions, its just a part of human nature. You're entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to mine.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2013, 01:18 by MushroomLizard »

Canvis the Smeargle

  • Guest
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #25 on: July 06, 2013, 03:33 »
I know this really isn't an interesting way to put it, but Garbodor isn't a failed idea. Ugly, gross, fat, something-left-to-rot-under-a-couch pile of junk? Exactly. The very first image to pop into my head when I think of Poison-type Pokémon.

Voltorb has one sharp edge of creativity that all other Pokémon aren't made of. Like Shuckle has the highest Defense stat of all Pokémon, Voltorb ranks the highest in uniquity. Voltorb, to start off its line, is the only Pokémon based off something that didn't come from real life, but was created by the Pokémon world itself. Everything else is based off something that exists in real life or was perceived in real life. Voltorb may be simple, but it's only as simple as a Pokeball. Which really, is as simple as it should've been all along. It only matters how you look at this trait that only Voltorb has. I choose to look at it as unique creativity.

The Pokémon I like and understand less than most is Nidoking. It's really not a good example of a Poison-type Pokémon, or a Ground-type either. It's based off a rhinoceros, most likely (Nidorino). That doesn't blend very well, to somehow manage to make a rhinoceros Poison-type. It just seems like those two types have been slapped on, that's all. Nidoking's sharp, purple coloring throws it off from looking like the Ground type, and its idea is distant from the Poison-type, that's why its typing seems exaggerated. I think Nidoking is just trapped between two subtle types trying to stand out. It's as if GameFreak tried to make the Poison typing more relevant by making Nidoking purple and making up the story that the Nidoking line has deadly poison in the horn. Tone down the color a bit and I'd say that Nidoking should have been correctly judged as a Ground/Fighting type.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2013, 03:42 by Canvis the Smeargle »

Offline Clairefable

  • worst jobby
  • Joeno Fan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1080
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
    • abandon hope all ye who enter here
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #26 on: July 06, 2013, 21:41 »
I know this really isn't an interesting way to put it, but Garbodor isn't a failed idea. Ugly, gross, fat, something-left-to-rot-under-a-couch pile of junk? Exactly. The very first image to pop into my head when I think of Poison-type Pokémon.

Thank you!!! Someone who agrees with me!

Garbodor is supposed to be yukky and gross and smelly and dirty looking. Garbage + odor?? Hardly sounds cute, does it? (Even though it is kinda cute)

quack98

  • Guest
Re: Terrible Pokemon ideas
« Reply #27 on: July 06, 2013, 21:46 »
Thank you!!! Someone who agrees with me!

Garbodor is supposed to be yukky and gross and smelly and dirty looking. Garbage + odor?? Hardly sounds cute, does it? (Even though it is kinda cute)

I don't think many people have a problem with it being disgusting and stuff, I think it's more the fact it's based of Garbage. Same problem Vannilish line has, they're based on inanimate objects. I didn't mind Trubbish when I first saw him, but then I saw garbordor, and I'm just like 'What is this? Has my DS glitches out?'