• Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

What is the most UN-creative Pokemon?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shymain

Shaymin Lover
Yes, I am. That is exactly what I am doing. This is a discussion forum, after all. I am fully entitled to tell people facts and point out flawed logic.
 

Mew The Gato

___________
See this is what I mean. You blank out the past arguments stated and now dont even know what I'm/you're talking about. You ignore/harass everyone that say something different than your view then circlejerk with everyone that agrees with you.



"I'm not flaming! I'm just telling everyone that they are wrong!"

No. I am constructive about it. If your points are valid and you are constructive about it, your post is fine, but do not expect to not receive any posts not countering yours.

Of course, that is what he means, as he is constructive about it. By your logic, saying, "You are wrong. Magikarp does not evolve at level 10, it evolves at level 20," is flaming.
 

RzK

Meow
This thread is going off topic.
But I say that Gen 1 designs were slightly uncreative, but the thing is, they can be excused since it was Gen 1 after all, and they were trying to make as many Pokemon as they could, so they didn't care much about design, really.
Fast forward to Gen 5, and now they have all the time and resources they require, so we are getting beautiful and creative,UNIQUE designs like Vanillite.
Think about it.
Nobody expected an Ice cream Pokémon. Isn't that UNEXPECTED and UNIQUE, guys? Creative, at least?
 

Dreamy

Well-Known Member
Actually, he wasn't saying that, and I doubt that he would stuff up his spelling and grammar like that. Look, I hate this thread concept, because even if you could have thought of the idea, isn't that exactly why they WOULD use it? Because they thought of it? Really, if the artwork is good, then that should be good enough for everyone.

Now, I dislike some Pokèmon, but there is no uncreative Pokèmon.
Everything stated above, plus it isn't always just about the aesthetics of a Pokemon, sometimes the story behind a Pokemon is enough for it to stand out.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but there isn't a definitive right or wrong answer to "is this un-creative?" creativity isn't defined by a set of rules that everyone has to follow, it's different in each and every one of us.

Don't be afraid to voice your opinion just refrain from telling someone else they are wrong in theirs.
 
Last edited:

The Benmeister

Master of Magnet
But not liking does not mean it is unoriginal. I do not like Sun Teams, but I did not say that they were bad as a fact. "Creative" is an adjective whose existence depends on fact, amount upon opinion by definition.

Even if we're going with the notion that every Pokemon is creative, there will still be some that are less creative than others.
 

IAintObeezy

Ban this Trainer
Uh, was my post ignored?
I was trying to put things right...

SHUT UP AND STAY IN THE CORNER!
They ignore everything that isn't telling them "your right" or "all pokemon are special snowflakes".

But I'll try to stay on topic. I'm tired of arguing with these earless forum buddies...
 
Last edited:

Shymain

Shaymin Lover
@RzK: No, it wasn't, and I fully agree with you, except for the Gen I Pokèmon aren't uncreative, and if they were, them being created in the old days isn't really a valid excuse, because they are still as creative as they ever will be, if it's not as creative, then they weren't designing to their full potential.

@IAintObeezy: And I'm tired of fighting with an illogical, insulting, rude, unreasonable troll. Namely, you. And no, I read every single post, I just decide which ones i want to respond to. Can you comprehend that? Because it doesn't seem as if you're capable of it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RzK

Dreamy

Well-Known Member
SHUT UP AND STAY IN THE CORNER!
They ignore everything that isn't telling them "your right" or "all pokemon are special snowflakes".

But I'll try to stay on topic. I'm tired of arguing with these earless forum buddies...
Resorting to name calling, classy

'None' is a valid answer to the question posed by this thread and I'm sticking to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RzK

LeafeonTheVoid

New changes
Because it's too much trouble to type this out again, here's a CP against uncreativity:



Yes, Geodude is just a rock, albeit a rock with arms, but Cacnea is just a cactus with arms, Pidgey is just a bird, Dragonite is just a dragon, Hitmontop looks like a guy, etc. Having a Pokémon look like a certain object does not make it uncreative. Muk and Grimer are actually toxic waste, so that argument is invalid.

Seel is just a one letter change, but what would you make it? I challenge you to come up with a short, catchy name that is similar to seal that is better than Seel. Really, try to do it. If you can't, then stop complaining.

Ditto is a purple blob – but that's because it's just a mass of DNA, hence the move transform, where the DNA can change into anything. And if you look into the backstory and details behind it, it's actually really interesting what theories you can come up with, such as Ditto is a failed clone of Mew, hence the reason why it is DNA.

For Garbodor family and the Vanillite family, I refer you back to the first paragraph. Inanimate objects are not bad – heck, they're even more creative than animal Pokémon, because you can't just slap some details onto an object, you have to change it tremendously whilst keeping the base so that it becomes alive, but is still similar to the object it is designed on.

For Chandelure, see the above – and consider looking into the backstories/creepypastas of its previous evolutions.

As I have said in this thread before, there is no such thing as an uncreative Pokèmon.

This has to be one of the most well thought out opinions I've read. I fully agree with you. Not all poke were created equal. Heck, some of the poke were made simple on purpose. The series is one big pun, from the designs based on RL creatures and objects to their very names. There is one issue however I do have: The Regi trio. Now don't get me wrong, I love the story behind them and I loved the gen 3 games. Regi rock is my personal favorite, but after reading the hidden braille messages and thinking, "Oh man, these things sound terrifying!" then seeing "hurr durr, ice crystal block and steel ball mass giants", it was a bit lack luster. IMO Regice and Registeel could've been designed better.
 
No. I am constructive about it. If your points are valid and you are constructive about it, your post is fine, but do not expect to not receive any posts not countering yours.

Of course, that is what he means, as he is constructive about it. By your logic, saying, "You are wrong. Magikarp does not evolve at level 10, it evolves at level 20," is flaming.
Does the new definition of "constructive" include ignoring every argument I and others have made and giving accolades to anything that resembles your position even if it's clearly illogical? You must think so. You cannot avoid this criticism unless you go back a few pages and answer the original criticisms of your position.

His logical position is that saying "Nuh-uh" to anything and everything you don't agree with and ignoring any and all ideas that oppose you is flaming. I don't think so, but it is borderline trolling- answer the criticisms or accept the original criticism.
 

The Benmeister

Master of Magnet
Exactly my point. But people are saying they are not creative instead of "one of the least creative" or "not very creative".

Fair enough, I can't really argue with that.

My fear is just that I see these type of arguments on almost every opinion based topic. Whilst it's true in a sense that every Pokemon can be seen as creative, people should be able to at least think otherwise for whatever reason, otherwise there is no reason for any opinion based topic to ever be created, and that's just boring. If someone thinks Voltorb or Trubbish are uncreative for just being a Pokeball/trashbag with eyes, then so be it.
 

Dreamy

Well-Known Member
Fair enough, I can't really argue with that.

My fear is just that I see these type of arguments on almost every opinion based topic. Whilst it's true in a sense that every Pokemon can be seen as creative, people should be able to at least think otherwise for whatever reason, otherwise there is no reason for any opinion based topic to ever be created, and that's just boring. If someone thinks Voltorb or Trubbish are uncreative for just being a Pokeball/trashbag with eyes, then so be it.
That's exactly the point I'm trying to get across as well, no one is right or wrong.

This should have been in the debate threads, since that's what it's turned into at this point.

Let's try to steer the discussion back on course, let's all agree to disagree and move on.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top