phanpycross
God-king
Another thing that kinda hurts it, are the type disstubutions, come on, did we really need 9 kinds of dragons, while us ground and bug lovers, are stuck with vivion and diggersby, it really needed to be more even.
Yes, but GF seems to be quiting of Pokemon standards.I'm really happy with the pokemon we got, but I do wish that instead of focusing so much on the mega evolutions they could have added some evolutions to previous pokemon (maybe Jynx? Farfetch'd?), some baby pokemon of previous pokemon (a baby Tropius would be so cute!), and a new legendary trio. Those were the things I really wanted.
Okay so as many of you may know, Kalos only gave us 69 new pokemon, and personally im not to crazy about it, to me it feels like gen 6 so far is really feeling like its the gen to get all the genwunners back, "oh look 2 mega charizards" and it feels like kalos is suffering for it.
But hey maybe im wrong, what do you guys think.
The mega-evolutions are cool, but it's not an excuse for the low number of new pokémon...
I think the type distribution was out of whack though, excluding Fairies (since of course they would show off the new type). Out of 69 Pokemon, there are nine Dragon types. Nine. That's five evolutionary lines. Despite it being the rarest type. Meanwhile, we only got one Bug line, one Water line that wasn't either version exclusive or a starter (and even then, one becomes a dragon) and four Normal lines of which only one was pure Normal. That isn't right.
I think that's why Kalos' Pokemon selection feels so small, even to me - the type diversity doesn't feel right. There's an overload of exotic types but the more common types are left out, so it feels devoid of filler, which in turn makes the number of Pokemon feel very small even if it isn't .
also GF has showed that things can change so its possible that pokemon z or x2 y2 might add a few more, a wild guess but may happen, its actually certain that they will add more megas in hoen remakes or the 3rd installment judging by the mega latias/latios
Tbh, Kanto (design wise) had the worst pokémons, by far. But who cares, they were sympathetic.
Unova's pokémon are far from being bad. People just hate it because it's fine/cool to hate new things and praise the old ones. I prefer Unova by a small amount over Kanto.
And I'm not saying less quantity = more quality. What I think, is that less quantity means they have a more free time to work on them. Something I don't see it happening when they need to create 150 pokémons or such.
Anyway, I'll admit that I'm disappointed in the lower number because I like seeing the new Pokémon and what new ideas GF brings to the table, plus it's always fun for me to use those new Pokémon in a new playthrough in a new region and the limited number kind of hurt that (the aforementioned poor type distribution also didn't help). Having said that, I can understand why there weren't so many considering all of the models, updates, and other features that GF had to work with when making this game so I can't hold the low number against them that much.
I think the lack of Kalos Pokémon was intentional. It's time to start slowing creation, especially with all the new features.
plus Mega Evos and Nostalgia, geez.
The lack of Pokémon itself didn't bother me much. What genuinely bothered me how the only cross-gen regular evolution was Sylveon the Eeveelution. I can't be the only person who thinks there are too many Eeveelutions now, right?
The only thing that was flawed IMO was the distribution of them throughout the game and how low of a chance you had of running into some of them. I missed out on many new Pokemon playing through the game solely because I didn't even run into them when I spent time in the route.
Like, I didn't even run into an Inkay until post-game.
I'm perfectly fine with it. Gen VI provided a nice selection of Pokémon both design-wise and competitive-wise (bar Dedenne & maybe Carbink). I loved the release of more normal-type Pokémon with a secondary type like Heliolisk, Diggersby & Pyroar. Also, there's some nice non-legendary, non-"pseudo-legendary" dragons (Dragalge, Tyrantrum, Noivern). I hated that Dragon-type Pokémon were mostly legendaries or pseudos bar 5 families (Kingdra, Flygon, Altaria, Druddigon & Haxorus).. not even a full team. Same with the focus on Ghost types like Gourgeist, Trevenant & Aegislash.
Also, Gen V was the gen of Bug, Dark & Steel, so I understand the lack of those types this time around and appreciate what's changed. Esp. the lack of Water & Normal types.
The way the developers undoubtedly see it, and the way I see it is that, even though it's a new feature and they have the same dex number, Mega Evolutions are in essence a new Pokémon.
Think about it:
Brand new designs
New types, stats, abilities
As such, when you add the 30 Mega Evolutions to the 71 new Pokémon, you get 101, which is just above Gen 2 in the amount of Pokémon.
Now I know they technically don't count, but they definitely factored into the developmental and design process as well as working out balance as new Pokémon.
Pretty much this for me too.Mega Evolutions should have only been a concept for Pokémon in a three stage evolutionary line or legendaries. The ones for Banette, Pinsir, Houndoom and Absol especially should have been a full fledged evolution.
In these complementary generations, there will inherently be lack of additions to some types. Remember how people moaned about lack of Fire pokemon in Sinnoh?
Now if Unova, a region that can stand on its own without old pokemon being part of the basic concept, was lacking in some types, THAT would be the curious case.
Kalos had tons of Grass, Water, Normal pokemon to choose from to fill any given area, so naturally they would want to add fancier stuff to the mix.
Zygarde says hai!There was only 1 new ground
There had to be more in the ancient world than Rock/Water for fossils.
>..> I might have a small obsession with the Fossil pokemon atm, but I think the point is still valid.
The point that water/rock and flying/rock have been repeated without covering the other available types is annoying though.Why are we ignoring the Grass-, Bug-, Steel-, Dragon-, Ice- and Flying-type dual-type fossils, though? Particularly as Rock/Water only makes up 3 of the 11 fossil Pokémon/lines.
That they haven't yet produced the exact type combination you're waiting on doesn't speak to a lack of variety.
Yes, but the problems were the types they chose to focus on. There were a lot of Dragons, specifically; five lines is what you'd expect from a larger gen. In a generation where we have a new type specifically to combat the existing Dragons, creating more of them is kind of missing your own point (yes, they might be easier to fight now, but the point is that they were being used too much, which having more of them doesn't help!). Again, having a strong bias towards Fairies this gen was expected for me, it's a brand new type so of course they are going to explore what they can do with it. What I wasn't expecting was for them to then make a lot of the new Pokemon of other rare types like Dragon and Rock as well. When you already have a good chunk of the selection be made of of something that's starting out as rare/uncommon, making everything else rare/uncommon makes your generation feel more like an expansion pack than a new adventure. Yes, I know the even-numbered gens are supposed to expand on older adventures, but in my opinion, it should still feel like it could stand of its own. Kalos' type diversity doesn't do that for me.
Similarly, I don't mind there not being a tonne of the more common types. But just one Bug type to pick from (and the common, weak butterfly, at that) and just one new Water type that is consistent across all copies regardless of starter or version? That's very limiting. I admit the Normal type thing was incorrect as they were experimenting with new type combos for that. But when it comes to Bug and Water... You don't get a lot of choice, particularly if you want Chespin or Fennekin. It makes team building a little hard for those who only want new Pokemon. It isn't a huge issue to me when it comes to the new Pokemon, but it's noticeable and makes me wonder what they were trying to go for. Yes, Sinnoh was missing Fire types and I know that, but for the rest of the types it seems fine. Kalos just seems very unbalanced to me.
What's with the half normal typing for heliolisk, diggersby, and pyroar?
Not sure which is a worse typing, grass/dark or rock/ice.
and with Noivern we got the first proper Flying type in history
I think what Mitja meant is that Noibat and Noivern were the first Pokémon with Flying as their primary type, but they could've worded it better.Er...no, that's not true. The first "proper" Flying-type was Tornadus in B/W - it was a pure Flying-type.
Because of this, any disappointment due to lack of pokemon can absolutely be applied in the same way to JOHTO and SINNOH.
So unless anyone was just as disappointed with those two gens, they're a hypocrite or blinded by nostalgia. I never heard anyone moan about how lacking Johto was though.
All three of these generations are designed with the fundamental idea of complementing the franchise as a whole, NOT TO BE STANDALONE generations (which is what Kanto, Unova were, and Hoenn attempted to do).
Gamefreak cleverly alternates between these two "types of generations".
But people will moan about it regardless of what they do.
Let me make this clear, I'm not saying Johto and Sinnoh sucked. I loved the direction each of the six gens took on their own merits. What I am saying is, there is no basis for being disappointed at gen 6 but not having done the same for gens 2 and 4.
...
Exactly!
I don't get it how Megas can get dismissed se easily by many people when bringing up the number of pokemon, when they all add the same amount of data as any regular evolution would.