These are unironically more similar looking than the Unova ones. I think we should just retire this whole "knockoff" argument, as it's always grasping at straws.
Therefore, the new rosters from XY and SwSh are the worst.
a-a-are those clearly different pokemon that just so happen to vaguely have a similar shape to something already made to fill in ecological niches, in a dex for a game meant to mostly be composed of new designs?
aieeeeeeee help me CHARIZAAAAARD I’M GOING INSANE!!!
Only one thats kind of stretching it is the Magneton - Metang comparison, but I get it with the theme of magnets+multiplying. Their roles are just too different for direct comparison. But yes, unironically based and truthpilled list.
Coincidentally, both Hoenn and Unova are the best regions alongside Gen 1... coincidence?
Yes, because Magneton and Metang serve a completely different purpose. One is a random unremarkable shitmon you find mid game, the other further evolves into a Psuedo legend end game. The only thing they have in common is a vague "magnet" motif, and even then its a tertiary element of Metang.
Ditto and Kecleon both have a similar role. Theyre both a mid game uncommon mon that play with a Pokemon altering its identity, albeit a different take on the concept. Theyre obviously much more similar, they just differ in design.. which, Metang and Magneton do too, so that comparison is null on your end.
If how they're used is relevant why are sandalash and arbok grouped against zangoose and seviper? Or parasect vs breloom? None of those play similarly. And if evolutions are important why are slakings completely ignored? Having three stages changes the role of the pokemon completely.
If how they're used is relevant why are sandalash and arbok grouped against zangoose and seviper?
Because they DO serve similar functions, obviously.
Zangoose/Seviper and Arbok/Sandslash are both early-mid game version exclusive counterparts.
Parasect and Breloom are both uncommon early game mushroom mons, which in the context of Pokemon, means they get Spore (an intentionally highly exclusive and very strong move).
>And if evolutions are important why are slakings completely ignored?
It's about the role they play and/or their concept, not counting evo lines 1-to-1. Metang's evolving further distances itself from Magneton not because the amount of evo lines matter, but because its an incomplete Pokemon, it evolves further and into something way the frick stronger. Magneton doesnt. They dont do anything remotely similar, and their concept isn't based on anything similar beyond a throwaway element (which at that point you could also compare Metagross' weight to Snorlax or something).
Metang isn't highly focused on being all about magnets like Magneton is. It DOES use magnetism, but its more focused on the psychic component, the supercomputer and fusion bit. So it's concept is only vaguely similar. And even so, I've only said it was a stretch to compare them, not that it's outright incompatible.
Similiarly, I think the Aggron-Rhydon comparison is fair even if there is no Aron counterpart for Rhyhorn, because theyre both strong, tanky Kaiju mon (with unexpectedly wide movepools possibly being an intentional design similarity too)
Slaking and Snorlax are both different takes on an extremely lazy Pokemon, so they at least have their base concept for comparison, even if they diverge from that.
My bad, forgot to greentext >If how they're used is relevant why are sandalash and arbok grouped against zangoose and seviper?
9 months ago
Anonymous
>#89. Arbok: Ekans’ evolution. Consequently, this Pokémon is also a venomous serpent. The markings on their belly have the appearance of a frightening face. Timid foes flee at the sight of such a “face.” They are skilled at using Glare that induces paralysis in their foe. If you encounter an Arbok on a path, you should avert your gaze. They are mortal enemies of Raticate. The two Pokémon fight viciously like a viper and a mongoose.
They had this planned since gen 1.
>It's about the role they play and/or their concept
It seems like it's just whichever one is more convenient for you. If you go by both of those at the same time none of those comparisons make sense. >fearow and pelipper
Weirdly enough they almost have the same BST, but one is a bully special attacker and the other a fast physical. Depending on how specific you are I guess the concept is the same. >the starters
None of them play like their Kanto counterparts. Blastoise/Swampert is the closest and they don't even use the same attacking stat. >nidos to volbeat/illumise
Come the frick on now.
>metang and magneton dont do anything remotely similar, and their concept isn't based on anything similar beyond a throwaway element
That's most of the chart.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>It seems like it's just whichever one is more convenient for you.
I didnt make this list, anon. I just brought up Metang as a criticism, since with the others i can at least agree there's a connection depending on how you interpret it. There's other's I'd disagree with too, for example, while Persian-Delcatty are obviously both cats, the Delcatty line is more akin to Clefairy.
>Depending on how specific you are I guess the concept is the same.
You're getting too specific, you need to look at it from the eyes of the devs. It's not a "we intended for both to be a special sweeper with higher physical bulk!", it's what purpose they serve the player. For Pelipper, it's an alternate selection for the early game bird mon, which serve as reliable, decently able mons throughout the game, but are easily replaceable.
Same goes for the starters. Obviously Charizard is a faster special attacker compared to Blaziken's mixed stats and better capability for taking advantage of its dual typing.. but at the end of the day, they both serve the same role as being strong elemental starters to pick from. It's pretty clear that they serve the same design purpose.
>nidos to volbeat/illumise
I wouldn't have made the comparison either, but again, I'm not OP. They DO have the similarity in that theyre gender dimorphic counterparts that vary in rarity depending on versions, but the similarities end there, as the bugs suck massive ass and the Nidos are meant to be strong and versatile.
>That's most of the chart.
No way. Everything on this chart can be linked through either a distinct gameplay function or a core design concept. Metang and Magneton CAN be linked through that, like I said, but its a much weaker connection.
9 months ago
Anonymous
(cont)
Just adding onto this, cause I feel like going full 'tismo explainer mode.
Kind of touched on visual design earlier, but I didnt go fully into that. Visual design IS important for these comparisons, it's just not a matter of being 1-to-1 with each other. Rather, how the design functions for the player.
I used Aggron to Rhydon as an example as being similar roles due to being Kaiju. To be clear, it's not just that "both kaiju=counterparts", but rather what that communicates. Both obviously look strong as frick, and especially look very physically bulky and offensive. That design helps communicate that to the player. They both happen to have oddly expansive movepools too which is iffy to me on if that was intentional as its pretty specific, but given that it happened twice (more if you count the Nidos) it might not be a coincidence. It does make sense that they could use elemental moves, considering Kaiju are known for breathing fire and whatnot. (Sidenote: The 2 diverge somewhat, in that Aggron's line is available earlier, but they end up reaching their final forms at roughly the same time. ). Point is, a lot of this is communicated through similar language.
Using another example, Ditto and Kecleon.. again, serve comparable functions, but unlike Aggron/Rhydon, look very different from one another. However, their looks DO tie into their function. It makes sense that a chameleon may change its qualities given its color changing motif. It makes sense that a Pokemon that could take any others form would look like an amorphous blob normally. So while they dont look the same in the sense that theyre both lizards or whatever, they have a similar visual design basis,andthat their designs are communicating form changes, which matters to the player.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>There's other's I'd disagree with too, for example, while Persian-Delcatty are obviously both cats, the Delcatty line is more akin to Clefairy.
Then how is the only one thats kind of stretching it is the Magneton - Metang comparison? >you need to look at it from the eyes of the devs.
You know nothing about what the devs were thinking while they were making the game.
Not even reading any more. Your posts are always the same. Long winded and full of yourself and obsessed with acting like you know what is and isn't good game design.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Then how is the only one thats kind of stretching it is the Magneton - Metang comparison?
Because theyre both 2 stage cat mons, so there's at least an aesthetic component that I can see where OP is getting at. You could even argue that Delcatty is condensing both the role of Clefairy and a aesthetic of Meowth into the line.
Metang lacks these. It doesn't serve a similar function in game at all, and visually or conceptually is only barely similar in a tangential manner.
>You know nothing about what the devs were thinking while they were making the game.
We know for a fact that this was their design process, they've straight up said as much, and literally said so with Gen 3. And, while they haven't literally given an itemized list of every Pokemon, the times that they HAVE given us examples (like Mincinno being a counterpart to Clefable) gives us a very clear idea of what they consider and how they think. It's not hard to rationalize from there, anon.
>acting like you know what is and isn't good game design.
I haven't commented on what is good game design or not, not sure where youre getting this from.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>nidos to volbeat/illumise >Come the frick on now.
Makes sense tho. After the Nidos, Volbeat and Illumise is literally the only time they attempted to do this concept of gender dimorphic versions of the same base counting as two different species that only interacts via breeding (NidoranF can give eggs of both NidoranM & NidoranF and Illumise can give eggs of both Volbeat & Illumise). I definitely think this was a deliberate throwback.
Anyone remember going to Pokemon.com to check the pokedex duriing the time of RS? The dex on the site only had the 200 available at the time. I remember looking through the dex with a friend at the time. I finished the game and the other kid didn't get it yet. I distinctly remember him saying alot of the Pokemon looked very similar to Red and Blue ones. He compared Aggron to Nidoking rather than Rhydon.
I also remember there was a secret base minigame where you could drag stuff around and make a base that you could print out. Those were simple times.
Frick yes I remember that. That shit was integral to the hype cycle for me. I remember seeing all the crazy monstrous shit RS had, like Exploud, Breloom, Aggron, etc.. and being so damn hyped.
IIRC, some of the later entries werent filled out before the game released (or my 10 yo attention span just didnt keep up all the way through, dunno). Rayquaza remained a genuine surprise for me, shit was so awesome.
>some of the later entries werent filled out before the game released
Oh I never knew that. By the time I went to check everyone including Rayquaza was already there. I beat the game already but didn't know Rayquaza existed and it was crazy to see.
This makes perfect sense if you pretend Pidgeot, Slakoth, Vigoroth, Exploud, Makuhita, Meditite, Aron, Nidorina, Nidorino, Nidoqueen, Nidoking, Sandshrew, Ekans, Walrein, Cloyster, Huntail, Gorebyss, and Metagross don't exists. Also just be
It’s okay when the designs are actually good, correct.
These are unironically more similar looking than the Unova ones. I think we should just retire this whole "knockoff" argument, as it's always grasping at straws.
Therefore, the new rosters from XY and SwSh are the worst.
Some are a stretch, but only 5 or 6 out of all that
>Hoenn
1 Flygon, 1 Winona
>Unova
0 Flygon, 1 cheap Winona knock-off
simple as
>Skyla a Winona knockoff
Skyla has mommy milkers and is a pilot, Winona is boring and flat as a board.
Krookodile is the "Flygon" of Unova(three stage Groundmon line that lives in deserts) and both later became mutualistic partners in lore.
they're dugtrio clones due to thier sand trapping
a-a-are those clearly different pokemon that just so happen to vaguely have a similar shape to something already made to fill in ecological niches, in a dex for a game meant to mostly be composed of new designs?
aieeeeeeee help me CHARIZAAAAARD I’M GOING INSANE!!!
>unovagay seething
You love to see it.
Only one thats kind of stretching it is the Magneton - Metang comparison, but I get it with the theme of magnets+multiplying. Their roles are just too different for direct comparison. But yes, unironically based and truthpilled list.
Coincidentally, both Hoenn and Unova are the best regions alongside Gen 1... coincidence?
>magnets that combine are a stretch to compare
>ditto and kecleon aren't
Smartest unironicallyposter.
Yes, because Magneton and Metang serve a completely different purpose. One is a random unremarkable shitmon you find mid game, the other further evolves into a Psuedo legend end game. The only thing they have in common is a vague "magnet" motif, and even then its a tertiary element of Metang.
Ditto and Kecleon both have a similar role. Theyre both a mid game uncommon mon that play with a Pokemon altering its identity, albeit a different take on the concept. Theyre obviously much more similar, they just differ in design.. which, Metang and Magneton do too, so that comparison is null on your end.
If how they're used is relevant why are sandalash and arbok grouped against zangoose and seviper? Or parasect vs breloom? None of those play similarly. And if evolutions are important why are slakings completely ignored? Having three stages changes the role of the pokemon completely.
If how they're used is relevant why are sandalash and arbok grouped against zangoose and seviper?
Because they DO serve similar functions, obviously.
Zangoose/Seviper and Arbok/Sandslash are both early-mid game version exclusive counterparts.
Parasect and Breloom are both uncommon early game mushroom mons, which in the context of Pokemon, means they get Spore (an intentionally highly exclusive and very strong move).
>And if evolutions are important why are slakings completely ignored?
It's about the role they play and/or their concept, not counting evo lines 1-to-1. Metang's evolving further distances itself from Magneton not because the amount of evo lines matter, but because its an incomplete Pokemon, it evolves further and into something way the frick stronger. Magneton doesnt. They dont do anything remotely similar, and their concept isn't based on anything similar beyond a throwaway element (which at that point you could also compare Metagross' weight to Snorlax or something).
Metang isn't highly focused on being all about magnets like Magneton is. It DOES use magnetism, but its more focused on the psychic component, the supercomputer and fusion bit. So it's concept is only vaguely similar. And even so, I've only said it was a stretch to compare them, not that it's outright incompatible.
Similiarly, I think the Aggron-Rhydon comparison is fair even if there is no Aron counterpart for Rhyhorn, because theyre both strong, tanky Kaiju mon (with unexpectedly wide movepools possibly being an intentional design similarity too)
Slaking and Snorlax are both different takes on an extremely lazy Pokemon, so they at least have their base concept for comparison, even if they diverge from that.
My bad, forgot to greentext
>If how they're used is relevant why are sandalash and arbok grouped against zangoose and seviper?
>#89. Arbok: Ekans’ evolution. Consequently, this Pokémon is also a venomous serpent. The markings on their belly have the appearance of a frightening face. Timid foes flee at the sight of such a “face.” They are skilled at using Glare that induces paralysis in their foe. If you encounter an Arbok on a path, you should avert your gaze. They are mortal enemies of Raticate. The two Pokémon fight viciously like a viper and a mongoose.
They had this planned since gen 1.
>It's about the role they play and/or their concept
It seems like it's just whichever one is more convenient for you. If you go by both of those at the same time none of those comparisons make sense.
>fearow and pelipper
Weirdly enough they almost have the same BST, but one is a bully special attacker and the other a fast physical. Depending on how specific you are I guess the concept is the same.
>the starters
None of them play like their Kanto counterparts. Blastoise/Swampert is the closest and they don't even use the same attacking stat.
>nidos to volbeat/illumise
Come the frick on now.
>metang and magneton dont do anything remotely similar, and their concept isn't based on anything similar beyond a throwaway element
That's most of the chart.
>It seems like it's just whichever one is more convenient for you.
I didnt make this list, anon. I just brought up Metang as a criticism, since with the others i can at least agree there's a connection depending on how you interpret it. There's other's I'd disagree with too, for example, while Persian-Delcatty are obviously both cats, the Delcatty line is more akin to Clefairy.
>Depending on how specific you are I guess the concept is the same.
You're getting too specific, you need to look at it from the eyes of the devs. It's not a "we intended for both to be a special sweeper with higher physical bulk!", it's what purpose they serve the player. For Pelipper, it's an alternate selection for the early game bird mon, which serve as reliable, decently able mons throughout the game, but are easily replaceable.
Same goes for the starters. Obviously Charizard is a faster special attacker compared to Blaziken's mixed stats and better capability for taking advantage of its dual typing.. but at the end of the day, they both serve the same role as being strong elemental starters to pick from. It's pretty clear that they serve the same design purpose.
>nidos to volbeat/illumise
I wouldn't have made the comparison either, but again, I'm not OP. They DO have the similarity in that theyre gender dimorphic counterparts that vary in rarity depending on versions, but the similarities end there, as the bugs suck massive ass and the Nidos are meant to be strong and versatile.
>That's most of the chart.
No way. Everything on this chart can be linked through either a distinct gameplay function or a core design concept. Metang and Magneton CAN be linked through that, like I said, but its a much weaker connection.
(cont)
Just adding onto this, cause I feel like going full 'tismo explainer mode.
Kind of touched on visual design earlier, but I didnt go fully into that. Visual design IS important for these comparisons, it's just not a matter of being 1-to-1 with each other. Rather, how the design functions for the player.
I used Aggron to Rhydon as an example as being similar roles due to being Kaiju. To be clear, it's not just that "both kaiju=counterparts", but rather what that communicates. Both obviously look strong as frick, and especially look very physically bulky and offensive. That design helps communicate that to the player. They both happen to have oddly expansive movepools too which is iffy to me on if that was intentional as its pretty specific, but given that it happened twice (more if you count the Nidos) it might not be a coincidence. It does make sense that they could use elemental moves, considering Kaiju are known for breathing fire and whatnot. (Sidenote: The 2 diverge somewhat, in that Aggron's line is available earlier, but they end up reaching their final forms at roughly the same time. ). Point is, a lot of this is communicated through similar language.
Using another example, Ditto and Kecleon.. again, serve comparable functions, but unlike Aggron/Rhydon, look very different from one another. However, their looks DO tie into their function. It makes sense that a chameleon may change its qualities given its color changing motif. It makes sense that a Pokemon that could take any others form would look like an amorphous blob normally. So while they dont look the same in the sense that theyre both lizards or whatever, they have a similar visual design basis,andthat their designs are communicating form changes, which matters to the player.
>There's other's I'd disagree with too, for example, while Persian-Delcatty are obviously both cats, the Delcatty line is more akin to Clefairy.
Then how is the only one thats kind of stretching it is the Magneton - Metang comparison?
>you need to look at it from the eyes of the devs.
You know nothing about what the devs were thinking while they were making the game.
Not even reading any more. Your posts are always the same. Long winded and full of yourself and obsessed with acting like you know what is and isn't good game design.
>Then how is the only one thats kind of stretching it is the Magneton - Metang comparison?
Because theyre both 2 stage cat mons, so there's at least an aesthetic component that I can see where OP is getting at. You could even argue that Delcatty is condensing both the role of Clefairy and a aesthetic of Meowth into the line.
Metang lacks these. It doesn't serve a similar function in game at all, and visually or conceptually is only barely similar in a tangential manner.
>You know nothing about what the devs were thinking while they were making the game.
We know for a fact that this was their design process, they've straight up said as much, and literally said so with Gen 3. And, while they haven't literally given an itemized list of every Pokemon, the times that they HAVE given us examples (like Mincinno being a counterpart to Clefable) gives us a very clear idea of what they consider and how they think. It's not hard to rationalize from there, anon.
>acting like you know what is and isn't good game design.
I haven't commented on what is good game design or not, not sure where youre getting this from.
>nidos to volbeat/illumise
>Come the frick on now.
Makes sense tho. After the Nidos, Volbeat and Illumise is literally the only time they attempted to do this concept of gender dimorphic versions of the same base counting as two different species that only interacts via breeding (NidoranF can give eggs of both NidoranM & NidoranF and Illumise can give eggs of both Volbeat & Illumise). I definitely think this was a deliberate throwback.
>kalosgay crying
Us hoenn bros drink their tears for breakfast
it's astounding how shamelessly hoenn rips off kanto. frickers even share 3 elite 4 types with kanto.
Anyone remember going to Pokemon.com to check the pokedex duriing the time of RS? The dex on the site only had the 200 available at the time. I remember looking through the dex with a friend at the time. I finished the game and the other kid didn't get it yet. I distinctly remember him saying alot of the Pokemon looked very similar to Red and Blue ones. He compared Aggron to Nidoking rather than Rhydon.
I also remember there was a secret base minigame where you could drag stuff around and make a base that you could print out. Those were simple times.
Frick yes I remember that. That shit was integral to the hype cycle for me. I remember seeing all the crazy monstrous shit RS had, like Exploud, Breloom, Aggron, etc.. and being so damn hyped.
IIRC, some of the later entries werent filled out before the game released (or my 10 yo attention span just didnt keep up all the way through, dunno). Rayquaza remained a genuine surprise for me, shit was so awesome.
>some of the later entries werent filled out before the game released
Oh I never knew that. By the time I went to check everyone including Rayquaza was already there. I beat the game already but didn't know Rayquaza existed and it was crazy to see.
This makes perfect sense if you pretend Pidgeot, Slakoth, Vigoroth, Exploud, Makuhita, Meditite, Aron, Nidorina, Nidorino, Nidoqueen, Nidoking, Sandshrew, Ekans, Walrein, Cloyster, Huntail, Gorebyss, and Metagross don't exists. Also just be
Simple fact:
Odd Gens > Even Gens
it's okay because they're not hideous abominations. unova only gave the series james turner, black people, and the ugliest pokemon designs ever
I saw an image just like this but it was about Kalos and Kanto and it conpared Gogoat to Sandslash, Furfrou to Lickitung and Heliolisk to Clefable.
i hate gen 3's spritework so much it's unreal