ITT unpopular opinions.
They must stop making bipedal Pokemon.
The only bipedal animal is the human race.
The game loses a lot of realism when you give a Pokemon human features.
ITT unpopular opinions.
They must stop making bipedal Pokemon.
The only bipedal animal is the human race.
The game loses a lot of realism when you give a Pokemon human features.
I know this is a bait thread but I just want to post a picture of a bird anyway.
Here’s an ostrich.
Very cool bird anon.
No, comrade. Wings count as legs.
why do you want realism on pokemon of all things
Because we're playing Pokemon for the realism, sure bud
mm gato sexo
You know nothing about biology
shut up Meg
Shut the frick up, nobody likes you
Nobody gives a frick what you have to say, right or wrong. Do us all a favor and frick off this board forever. X
have a nice day tripBlack person.
I legitimately sincerely think the world would be a better place if you killed yourself
no, you fat butthole
quadmons are always dogshit unless a deliberate effort is made by gf to make them good
She has it backwards. The overweight mom should be proud to have such a hot, sexy daughter.
>such a hot, sexy daughter
She's 11.
Behold! A human!
birds arent animals
>The only bipedal animal is the human race.
Birds are bipedal, as are pangolins.
Love these little guys.
Pangolins are so friggin cool
But they're monsters...
I think the issue arises because the series doesn't present Pokémon as monsters despite their fantastical nature. Monsters are often associated with aggressiveness, as scary and at times the unknown.
We know from early guidebooks that they didn't want 3rd parties referring to Pokémon as monsters as early as 1998. This is in contrast to series like Digimon where they proudly wear the monster label, and it also helps that Digimon are otherworldy digital creatures. It’s also telling when Pokémon designers talk about ecosystems, or The Pokémon Company explicitly telling others that Pokémon *replace* real animals in-universe with zero mentions of monsters, indeed in that same section TPC tells others not to refer to Pokémon as monsters. Likewise we know thanks to Takeshi Shudo that from the start the anime decided to depict Pokemon and human relationships as the relationship between animals and humans in the real world. Pokémon are usually not portrayed as aggressive nor scary and they're not otherworldly or bizarre, in-universe, creatures, they're very much attached to the natural and the natural world. And more importantly is that the series itself seems to reject the monster label even in the games.
Given these circumstances it shouldn't really surprise us when others don't think of Pokémon as monsters when the series itself doesnt and makes a concentrated effort to separate Pokémon from that label.
>And more importantly is that the series itself seems to reject the monster label even in the games.
There's literally pokemaniac in SV that likens his team to movie monsters, with that exact phrasing
That's not the same as saying they're monster but just comparing to movie monsters which shows that the people of the Pokémon universe do have a concept of what a monster is and second that Pokémon do not fall under that concept. When Nemona, or Penny, hear the word monster their first response is to ask if they're dealing with Pokémon. In Legends of Arceus, at a time people were less familiar with Pokémon, the word monster is never used to describe Pokémon, instead the game makes use of words like "creature", "beast" and even "wild creature" but not monster.
this "pokemon aren't monsters" is the stupidest fricking bullshit that was ever uttered by officials. the term "pokemon" literally means pocket MONSTER. also, pokedex entries constantly portray them as extremely dangerous creatures that should be feared, like Rhyhorn for example, it can knock down tall buildings
Rhyhorn did 9/11.
Pokemon just stands for Pokémon, it stop being pocket monsters a long time ago. The term pocket monsters remains grandfathered in only in Japan and for marketing purposes for the games titles. But in other markets the term never existed, and even early product guides dating to the 90s were telling 3rd parties not to call Pokemon monsters.
you know youre a homosexual when the tripgay makes fun of you
pokémon=/=animals
Who knew 11 year olds could be so frickable. Oh wait, I play Pokemon, I knew that.
bipedal pokemon are ok, but furrymon like shitcerace are unforgivable
I think people should stop caring so much about unused types so much
Even though alot of pokemon designs are getting out of hand, I still think the series shouldn't restrict itself as to what they can and cannot be based.
Psychic has some of the best designs.
I think every pokemon should have more than 4 moves. Maybe between 6-8. The center pic is what I had I mind.
It’s a good thing that Pokemon games are easy because you can use literally anything you want and not feel too bad about it.
My favourite game is PLA. SV comes in 2nd place. Before these games Hoenn and Alola were my favourite regions.
SM (haven't played USUM) were comfy and soulful games. I enjoyed the story a lot and just wish they expanded on the Ultra Beasts more. Here's hoping one day we'll get to go to Ultra Space as a game itself.
They should have stopped saying all Pokemon are animals a long time ago. That's what Digimon did and it worked out well for them. They realized it would be weird to need to clean up Angewoman's shit, so they just said she isn't an animal. Pokemon should do something like that.