removing real-world references such as indian elephants being shocked to death was probably the worst retcon, i liked when pokemon was implied to be a post-nuke thing and these weird creatures just existed with regular animals.
i'm not gonna count beta stuff nor scrapped movie ideas (like the fricking t-rex fossil movie) as retcons, but the nuke allegories only get bigger with them. i can at least say that i'm glad it wasn't so in-your-face like in the final release
I like good post-apocalypse ideas, and have the same idea. Pokemon takes place in the further future, which is why concepts are futuristic while underdeveloped because of new animal dependence.
removing real-world references such as indian elephants being shocked to death was probably the worst retcon, i liked when pokemon was implied to be a post-nuke thing and these weird creatures just existed with regular animals.
i'm not gonna count beta stuff nor scrapped movie ideas (like the fricking t-rex fossil movie) as retcons, but the nuke allegories only get bigger with them. i can at least say that i'm glad it wasn't so in-your-face like in the final release
The first game literally has the space shuttle Columbia and an oldman remembering seeing the Moon landing with his first color TV he bought just for that event. Pokemon has never EVER been in a post-apocalyptic future, it has been the present of our world but with Pokemon since the beginning.
The only problem i have with fairy type is that it counters offensive types and is only weak to two defensive ones. It made the metagame more defensive
Fairy should be weak to Normal to balance both types. Normal is a broken offensive type in Inverse Battles as nothing resists it. >inb4 Inverse Battle is a Gen 6 gimmick and doesn't exist anymore
Maybe it should be brought back. It's fun.
them going so far out of their way to outright erase ash-greninja after pushing it so hard is hilarious in a morbid way
what changed to make them not want it around anymore?
Possibility 1: Backlash from the Kalos Arc in the anime. Unlikely since it was introduced to the games after it happened.
Possibility 2: It was too strongly tied to Ash, so either there was no point in having it any longer if Ash was retiring or they wanted to not have Ash in the games outside of indirect easter eggs.
Possibility 3: Bond was basically Mega Evolution with a different name exclusive to only 1 Pokemon. Maybe parts of Ash-Greninja will be retconned into Legends Z-A's Mega Greninja if it gets one.
>Retcon doesn't mean contradiction.
It does, yeah. If a single world wasn't established then there being multiple ones doesn't change a previous statement.
> until ORAS
until BW. ORAS was when your favorite poketuber told you so.
[...] >The Kanto legendaries still being there in HGSS is a retcon from the originals
Not really, like most things mentioned in this thread, is not a retcon, as that wasn't established.
>until ORAS >until BW. ORAS was when your favorite poketuber told you so.
Wasn't BW's only in an optional side quest for an item unlike ORAS where it was in the main story?
It's amazing how the only actual retcon mentioned in this thread is the removal of real world references.
Pokemon fans are truly special.
>Wasn't BW's only in an optional side quest for an item unlike ORAS where it was in the main story?
ORAS's was in the post game quest. And BW still came out prior so that was the introduction.
>Pokemon shrink when threatened or on command to enter Pokeballs
This destroys the universe.
No Pokemon could ever be predated. Why do the Arrowkuda and Pikachu not simply shrink to escape from the Cramorant? Why don't any of the Pokemon in Pokemon Snap not shrink away when threatened? Why don't any Pokemon in Mystery Dungeon do it to survive? No wild Pokemon could ever have been successfully hunted by a human. No lost Pokemon would ever be found if it ran away of its own accord. How many problems would have been solved in the anime if ANY Pokemon had just willingly shrunk down to do something?
Its completely nonsensical.
Regardless of your opinion on shrinking, it has been around since the beggining, so not a retcon.
>worst
Removing normal animals
Deciding pokemon have always veen a thing instead of a new post-war anomaly >best
Silver being Giovanni's and his female admin's kid
>Deciding pokemon have always veen a thing instead of a new post-war anomaly
They never were that, there literally were fossilmons in gen fricking 1. The original lore was that somehow nobody gave a shit until the 17th century which is preWW2, so was the invention of pokeball (originally) in '25, also preWW2.
>Silver being Giovanni's and his female admin's kid
Silver's mom is unconfirmed.
1 month ago
Anonymous
I won't argue the fossils, as a kid I just figured they were an accident.
But Ariana literally has red hair with the same sticking up hair floof points that Silver has.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Yes, and?
[...]
If it was mentioned offhand in early material and completely ignored in all media until decades later, it is a retcon.
The way anime Pokeballs operate for examples, directly contradicts the natural shrinking ability.
>If it was mentioned offhand in early material and completely ignored in all media until decades later, it is a retcon.
It wasn't ignored though. And if it was introduced early its not a retcon.
It contradicting your favorite poketuber headcanon doesn't change anything. >The way anime Pokeballs operate for examples
You mean the ones Ash uses to carry the clearly-larger-than-a-hand Charizard with?
It was an overreaction of the Gen 4 and 5 meta post Physical/Special Split.
Defensive Pokemon in Gen 3 and back could just be bulky. Reliable healing was not a baseline requirement to be a defensive mon, because your weaknesses could be entirely absent from one side of the physical/special split. There was no way to hit, Skarmory or Milotic super effective on the physical side, nor a way to hit Ludicolo or Blissy super effective on the special side. That means mixed attackers were really the only way to be a true wall breaker, and they inherently had more weaknesses because their stats were spread so thin.
Come Gen 4, and defense borderline does not exist anymore. Your game state is considered advantageous if you are down a mon with Stealth Rocks, because your offensive pressure just got better. Then with non-legendary permanent weather in Gen 5, and defense completely collapsed.
So, Gen 6 added Fairy, a great defensive type that requires traditional defensive types to answer to, and insanely upscaling massive defensive abilities to provide defensive pokemon free resources, like Unaware or Regenerator.
Now, even though the defense and offense is more even than gen 4 or 5, defense is so much more annoying to deal with, since they don't have to work to recover or try to squeeze in Encore/Haze/Roar user to ignore a set up sweeper. They just get all that shit for free.
>It was an overreaction of the Gen 4 and 5 meta post Physical/Special Split. >Defensive Pokemon in Gen 3 and back could just be bulky. Reliable healing was not a baseline requirement to be a defensive mon, because your weaknesses could be entirely absent from one side of the physical/special split. There was no way to hit, Skarmory or Milotic super effective on the physical side, nor a way to hit Ludicolo or Blissy super effective on the special side. That means mixed attackers were really the only way to be a true wall breaker, and they inherently had more weaknesses because their stats were spread so thin. >Come Gen 4, and defense borderline does not exist anymore. Your game state is considered advantageous if you are down a mon with Stealth Rocks, because your offensive pressure just got better. Then with non-legendary permanent weather in Gen 5, and defense completely collapsed. >So, Gen 6 added Fairy, a great defensive type that requires traditional defensive types to answer to, and insanely upscaling massive defensive abilities to provide defensive pokemon free resources, like Unaware or Regenerator. >Now, even though the defense and offense is more even than gen 4 or 5, defense is so much more annoying to deal with, since they don't have to work to recover or try to squeeze in Encore/Haze/Roar user to ignore a set up sweeper. They just get all that shit for free.
interesting
may be useful
>Fairy type…
…should’ve been introduced earlier. Clefairy/Clefable, Jigglypuff/Wigglytuff, Togepi/Togetic, etc. being Normal type never made any sense to me (nor did I think any other type currently existing fit them). Fairy was the perfect type for filling in that obvious gap. My only major complaint about Fairy is that it should only resist Dragon instead of being immune. Also, it shouldn’t resist Bug.
there are only 151 pokemon in the world and mega evolution exclusive in kalos
Neither of these were ever established.
Fossilmons still being alive today
Artifiicial mons like Voltorb or Porygon existing in the distant past (PLA)
Legendaries being able to evolve, makes zero sense
>Artifiicial mons like Voltorb or Porygon existing in the distant past (PLA)
So, you never played the game. Porygon, Magnemite, etc. is exclusively found in space-time distortions where Pokemon from the future are brought to the past. Voltorb has a regional form and is not artificial in PLA.
multiple timelines
It's a lazy way to say everything and nothing is canon
This way any inconsistencies can be excused by saying it's another timeline
Not a retcon, been this way since Gen 1 simply because of version exclusives.
Fairy should be mutually ineffective against Normal, just like Normal and Ghost are immune to eachother.
>Neither of these were ever established
So you’re telling me that Oak in RBY says his dream is to make a complete pokedex of all the Pokemon in the world and then gives pokedexes to Red and Blue to complete it for him but just leaves it at 151 slots to fill for no reason? Keep in mind that Oak is the lead researcher of Pokemon in the world and is friends with Rowan, Elm, and has a cousin in Alola yet he doesn’t know that there are more Pokemon out there?
nta but you could spin that as "he wants to make a complete pokedex but first starts by making a purely regional dex so the child that he's giving it to that definitely isn't going to leave kanto won't get overwhelmed by the sheer numbers"
the idea is probably that Oak is outsourcing the pokedex to other regions to fill in the rest, which is why every other professor seems to have an identically named device with an identical function to the original
>So you’re telling me that Oak in RBY says his dream is to make a complete pokedex of all the Pokemon in the world and then gives pokedexes to Red and Blue to complete it for him but just leaves it at 151 slots to fill for no reason?
So you're telling me that you can get a certificate for completing the dex even if you have 150 even though there is record of 151 being present? Anyway, yes. The world is whatever is known, he couldn't have known what wasn't known. It's that simple.
>XY: Lucario is the first known Pokemon to mega evolve >ORAS: actually is Rayquaza
>>XY: Lucario is the first known Pokemon to mega evolve >>ORAS: actually is Rayquaza
They never say this. The meeting of humanity and Rayquaza marked the beginning of the Draconid clan's duty to pass down the lore and Zinnia's gran says that in doing so it was just the mechanism for mega evolution that was discovered. Don't believe everything you read on Bulbapedia.
Existing in "different universes" doesn't make it not a retcons, that's just an explanation for the retcons.
For example, all ORAS did was write the pre-Gn 6 games off as an alternate timeline where AZ never created his weapon and thus Mega Evolution never came to exist.
But Gen 6 onwards have all been in the same timeline. The pre-Gen 6 timeline is now basically invalid as there will never be another game taking place in it.
>For example, all ORAS did was write the pre-Gn 6 games off as an alternate timeline where AZ never created his weapon and thus Mega Evolution never came to exist.
They never did this either. Mega Evolution is perfectly capable of existing in RSE which they said in ORAS with the infinity energy subplot too. The lorewank is just another spin on the same multiversal shit that's been in the series since forever and plot-wise since BW.
>Neither of these were ever established.
Sycamore quite literally states that the Mega Evolution phenomenon has only been witnessed in Kalos during XY. Whether ORAS takes place before or after that game it doesn't matter, because surely the lead authority on Mega Evolution would notice when several trainers in another region are openly using it, INCLUDING THE CHAMPION.
>Sycamore quite literally states that the Mega Evolution phenomenon has only been witnessed in Kalos during XY.
Not true. >It’s only a hypothesis, but I think the bond between Pokémon and Trainer is the key to this new Evolution. But what is this bond, exactly? And why are there examples of
Mega Evolution only in the Kalos region? There’s still so much we don’t know...
Key word is example: >a person or thing regarded in terms of their fitness to be imitated or the likelihood of their being imitated.
And according to ORAS, we know that the Ultimate Weapon was what led to the discovery of Mega Evolution in "this" universe at all. You even have Sycamore's researchers note the help from other region's experts which is something they directly reference in ORAS.
Don't blame the game for you jumping to conclusions.
>But what is this bond, exactly? And why are there examples of Mega Evolution only in the Kalos region? There’s still so much we don’t know...
This literally proves my point you mongoloid. I didn't say it only EXISTED in Kalos, I said tht it has only been WITNESSED in Kalos, which is fricking absurd given Hoenn has prominent trainers using it on their teams and a whole host of ones unique to the region. Unless ORAS takes place AFTER XY (which is unlikely given the mentions of AZ heavily imply it took place before he found Floette at XY's finale) and the Megas were only recently discovered (also really fricking unlikely given how they're spread around and no one seems surprised at their prescence) it makes no sense.
>I didn't say it only EXISTED in Kalos, I said tht it has only been WITNESSED in Kalos
Which isn't true, given that people in Kalos reference help from other regions in Sycamore's study of megas. You're headcanonning "witnessed" in yourself.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Which isn't true, given that people in Kalos reference help from other regions in Sycamore's study of megas
Then Sycamore's mentioning that there were only examples in Kalos makes no sense.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Then Sycamore's mentioning that there were only examples in Kalos makes no sense.
That's a you problem. You don't understand what "examples" means, just like many don't understand what they meant when they said Rayquaza was "the beginning of all" when they were talking about Draconid lore and not mega evolution as a whole.
1 month ago
Anonymous
I don't care about the first Mega you dumbass, I care that Sycamore such a shitty researcher that he was apparently completely ignorant of an entire set of foreign Megas existing and being used by another region. You still haven't explained how he was entirely ignorant of the phenomenon existing elsewhere despite ORAS taking place within close proximity of the XY story btw.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>I care that Sycamore such a shitty researcher that he was apparently completely ignorant of an entire set of foreign Megas existing and being used by another region.
But he's not. There is clearly evidence of them in other regions as indicated by the rest of XY, but Sycamore is concerned with the source, origins, and mechanics of it. Which as he says, there are only examples of in Kalos.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Sycamore is concerned with the source, origins, and mechanics of it. Which as he says, there are only examples of in Kalos.
There is literally nothing in the statement that indicates that he's more concerned with the origins of the phenomenon in that context than the fact that it's simply being expressed in the first place.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>There is literally nothing in the statement that indicates that he's more concerned with the origins of the phenomenon in that context than the fact that it's simply being expressed in the first place.
Except, that statement doesn't occur in a vacuum. >Also, I want to ask for your help in solving the Kalos region’s biggest Pokémon mystery: the secret and potential of Mega Evolution
Not Mega Evolution itself, not the existence of Mega Evolution at all. The secret and potential of Mega Evolution.
1 month ago
Anonymous
"The secret and potential of Mega Evolution" is such a ridiculously vague and nebulous "trying to sound profound" nothing statement (many of which litter this series' dialogue when it comes time to discuss lore) that using it to try and prove a point is fricking asinine. If anything, understanding the "secret and potential" of the phenomenon would require actively studying it's direct use and anything even remotely similar when the opportunity arises, which includes the """"incredibly similar""""" phenomenon happening in another region which just so happens to both give off the same energy, have the same requirements, and visually look exactly the same as it does in Sycamore's home region.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>which includes the """"incredibly similar""""" phenomenon happening in another region which just so happens to both give off the same energy, have the same requirements, and visually look exactly the same as it does in Sycamore's home region.
Right, because as we established: Mega Evolution itself isn't exclusive to Kalos, examples of it relating to the secret of its existence are. Meanwhile, other regions are still corroborating Sycamore's research and it's because of the events from Hoenn that his work was propelled forward to what we see in XY.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Right, because as we established: Mega Evolution itself isn't exclusive to Kalos, examples of it relating to the secret of its existence are.
Once again, his statement made absolutely no reference to the "secret". Even if that statement preceded it, he still posed the question of Mega Evolution only showing examples in Kalos as another one of it's mysteries to be solved. This isn't a mystery, because it HAD been natively expressed in other regions, so this phrasing is, at best, written incredibly sloppily and a prime example of a stupid person trying to write a smart person, or, at worst, a statement that was invalidated by the immediately succeeding game.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>a statement that was invalidated by the immediately succeeding game.
Which doesn't happen. The whole "mystery" of mega evolution is left on a cliffhanger at the end of XY with the sundial. That's immediately addressed in ORAS which sets the framework for the events of XY in a loop. >Even if that statement preceded it, he still posed the question of Mega Evolution only showing examples in Kalos as another one of it's mysteries to be solved.
Yes. Because as we know from ORAS, the key element of Mega Evolution's discovery was the Ultimate Weapon. The only exemplary cases of Mega Evolution in that context are in Kalos. There is no Ultimate Weapon anywhere else.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Yes. Because as we know from ORAS, the key element of Mega Evolution's discovery was the Ultimate Weapon.
Once again, the statement was proposed DIVORCED from the idea that it needed to be tied to the secret, as if it was another thing about Mega Evolution that needed to be solved. The implication that he specifically and only meant in the context of it's origin is simply just not there. "The secret of Mega Evolution" is not a phrase that has bearing on "There are only examples of Mega Evolution in Kalos".
This entire conversation is just going in circles, and I have an assignment we need to start soon. We're just gonna have to agree to disagree
1 month ago
Anonymous
It's called context clues, anon. Sycamore's line of research is concerned with one particularly significant aspect about Mega Evolution. That's hammered in the entire game.
There's no one to blame but yourself for not understanding what "examples" means.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>he still posed the question of Mega Evolution only showing examples in Kalos as another one of it's mysteries to be solved.
NTA but you're reading it as >why is mega evolution exclusive to kalos?
When it's >why are SOME mega evolutions exclusive to kalos
I wonder what will happen if they do end up remaking BW, the only fairy types in the game would be Cottonee/Whimsicott, and I'm sure GF wouldn't be happy with that so they may decide the Solosis and Gothita lines are now fairy or something
all they'd need to do to get around that issue is just reincorporate the dream world or some equivalent into the main game
the type distribution of the dex doesn't really matter if the player can just get more varies from outside of it
and enamorus would probably also be put into the game unless they stupidly decide that giving all remakes identical dexes should be a thing moving forward, which is dumb
Fossilmons still being alive today
Artifiicial mons like Voltorb or Porygon existing in the distant past (PLA)
Legendaries being able to evolve, makes zero sense
>Fossilmons still being alive today
That’s because people brought fossils back to life, increased the population by breeding new ones and then released them into the wild. Not a retcon. >Artifiicial mons like Voltorb or Porygon existing in the distant past (PLA)
Voltorb is pretty dumb because they don’t even serve as mimics in PLA and Hisuian Electrode has existed far longer than the pokeball since it’s a Noble Pokemon. >Legendaries being able to evolve, makes zero sense
No legendary has been retconned into being able to evolve unless you count mega evolution and primal reversion.
The Kanto legendaries being in HGSS. I always thought you couldn’t catch them in GSC because Red had already caught them. In HGSS you can visit the same locations as in the Kanto games and catch them which I guess is more content, but I liked the idea that Red has them but just chooses to use his bros instead.
The Kanto legendaries still being there in HGSS is a retcon from the originals, but my speculation as to why they’re not there in GSC is pretty much headcanon.
i wonder if that's how it is for like, most legendaries >some gaylord keeps building the regis and in fact keeps building more kinds of them, and there were in fact multiple regigigas that toted around continents >kyogre vs. groudon is just super ancient gang wars, the leader of them all was probably whatever managed to get their hands on primal energy
the biggest arguments i can make for only one legendary per timeline would probably be entei, raikou, and suicune, but chances are the pokemon they were before they turned into them are still out there and just needs a ho-oh to sprinkle magic fairy dust on them when they die for some reason
Maybe Regigigas had multiple Registeel/rock/ice before he got locked up. That could explain their multiples at lest.
>XY: Lucario is the first known Pokemon to mega evolve >ORAS: actually is Rayquaza
This can just be put down to Lucario being the first known mega evolution in Kalos and they didn't know about Rayquaza in a region on the other side of the world. Sort of like different countries claim that they had an explorer who found America before Columbus.
Lusamine having her exposure to Nihilego retconned away in USUM leaves so many holes in the story since they tried to keep as many scenes from the base game as they could.
>It's a lazy way to say everything and nothing is canon
Not really. Try to understand what the concept is.
Its also not a retcon as it was never stated there was a single one.
That literally is what a retcon is. Retroactive continuity. Continuity added retroactively.
There's more than one kind of retcon.
>The first is addition. This is a new detail added to give the reader or viewer a new understanding of the story. This detail would not have been planned when a series was first being made
>The second is alteration. This is a detail goes against details already given.
>The third is subtraction. This is a detail that gets ignored or forgotten later in a series.
Goku being an alien is a retcon. Darth Vader being Luke Skywalker's father is a retcon. Alfred raising Batman is a retcon (originally, he wasn't hired until Batman was already an adult).
A retcon does not have to contradict. There are plenty of retcons that simply add new details without contradicting anything that was previously established. Pokemon is full of these kinds of retcons.
"Retcon" would be a useless term if it only applied to contradictions.
Now try saying that outside the pokemon fanbase. Kudos for knowing about Goku, Darth Vader or Batman though. >"Retcon" would be a useless term if it only applied to contradictions.
Not really, which is why the term was coined in the first place.
Retcon is when you start pretending something always happened that was different. Adding shit to a story is just what the story is supposed to do.
The only retcon you described is Batman's.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Not really, which is why the term was coined in the first place.
Yes, because we already have a word for contradictions; contradiction.
Retcon means retroactive continuity; continuity that was added retroactively.
>Retcons sometimes do not contradict previously established facts but instead fill in missing background details, usually to support current plot points. This is known as an additive retcons.
Like the other anon, retcons can either add new information without contradicting anything, alter information, or subtract information.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Yes, because we already have a word for contradictions; contradiction.
No one said retcon and contradiction are the same thing.
>Retcon means retroactive continuity; continuity that was added retroactively.
By changing an established fact about the past.
Otherwise its just continuity.
>Like the other anon, retcons can either add new information without contradicting anything, alter information, or subtract information.
That's just regular story continuity, why do you have to add the "retroactive"?
>Retcon doesn't mean contradiction.
It does, yeah. If a single world wasn't established then there being multiple ones doesn't change a previous statement.
> until ORAS
until BW. ORAS was when your favorite poketuber told you so.
The Kanto legendaries still being there in HGSS is a retcon from the originals, but my speculation as to why they’re not there in GSC is pretty much headcanon.
>The Kanto legendaries still being there in HGSS is a retcon from the originals
Not really, like most things mentioned in this thread, is not a retcon, as that wasn't established.
Why do you think the "retroactive" was added to the word "continuity" anon?
1 month ago
Anonymous
Because the information wasn't always planned. The reason Goku being an alien and Vader being Luke's father are retcons is because they weren't originally planned. Goku was just a human kid with a monkey tail (animal people were everywhere in Dragon Ball). Vader is a retcon because Obi-Wan said “A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father.”, which means that at the time of writing A) Darth Vader was his actual name, not a title. and B) Vader and Luke's father were two separate people.
1 month ago
Anonymous
A good exercise for you would be to deal with media outside pokemon. You'll realize that pretty much nothing is planned, which is why most fanbases don't make a big deal about most changes.
The word retcon was for special cases where established aspects were changed. Not when a story was expanded.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>The word retcon was for special cases where established aspects were changed
This has never been the case at all.
Retcon has always applied to anything that expands upon or recontextualizes past events.
The term applies to ANY kind of change to a story, whether it's addition, alteration, or subtraction. Narrowing it down to only refer to contradictions makes the term entirely useless.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>recontextualizes
That sounds like a change happened. >The term applies to ANY kind of change to a story
Anon, the story changes all the time.
If we were to go by your definition, then Luke destroying the death star would already be a retcon because the death star that was there before is now no more.
How is that not useless?
1 month ago
Anonymous
>recontextualizes
That sounds like a change happened. >The term applies to ANY kind of change to a story
Anon, the story changes all the time.
If we were to go by your definition, then Luke destroying the death star would already be a retcon because the death star that was there before is now no more.
How is that not useless?
Retcons do not necessarily mean contradictions. Goku being an alien is a recon. There is nothing to imply he is an alien prior to raditz showing up (because toriyama hadn't thought of it yet) but there's also not anything that proves he's not an alien. However being a saiyan "retroactively" is used to explain aspects of his character. >Why is Goku so strong?
He comes from a warrior race >Why does he have a tail?
Saiyan have tails >Why does he turn into a giant ape at a full moon?
It's a saiyan reaction to the waves emitted by light reflected off the moon. >How come Goku seems to come back stronger after every defeat
Saiyans biologically power up when coming back from near death.
None of these things really needed explanation but now the explanation is all handled by "he's an alien." It also has the consequence of implying anytime Goku won a rematch it had less to do with training or skill and more to do with biological advantages. But also it bleeds into character traits too. >Why does Goku like fighting so much
Saiyans naturally love battle. > Why does Goku eat so much
Saiyans need to eat a lot of food. >Why is Goku so dopey
Because he had an accident where he bumped his head as a child and became nice.
It's a reveal that not only changes what the story can do moving forward but also how we interpret Goku's character prior to this reveal and on subsequent rereads.
The "blowing up the death star" doesn't change anything about how we interpret the past events of the characters. It doesn't "retroactively" change anything. Its an active change en media res. Proactive continuity.
Better retcons: >Removing incense as a requirement for pre-evos introduced after Gen 2. >Allowing evolutions that required special overworld objects or effects to evolve with evolution stones instead
Worse retcons: >The overall divorce of the Pokemon world being very similar to our real world, but with Pokemon slightly futuristic technology >Introducing substitute alphabets for text in in-game objects in the worst way possible
I don’t know if this counts but incenses. Snorlax should have just bred Munchlax in Gen IV. Needing a held item or it breeds a fully adult Snorlax is extremely dumb.
>Pokemon shrink when threatened or on command to enter Pokeballs
This destroys the universe.
No Pokemon could ever be predated. Why do the Arrowkuda and Pikachu not simply shrink to escape from the Cramorant? Why don't any of the Pokemon in Pokemon Snap not shrink away when threatened? Why don't any Pokemon in Mystery Dungeon do it to survive? No wild Pokemon could ever have been successfully hunted by a human. No lost Pokemon would ever be found if it ran away of its own accord. How many problems would have been solved in the anime if ANY Pokemon had just willingly shrunk down to do something?
It's amazing how the only actual retcon mentioned in this thread is the removal of real world references.
Pokemon fans are truly special.
>Wasn't BW's only in an optional side quest for an item unlike ORAS where it was in the main story?
ORAS's was in the post game quest. And BW still came out prior so that was the introduction.
[...]
Regardless of your opinion on shrinking, it has been around since the beggining, so not a retcon.
[...] >Deciding pokemon have always veen a thing instead of a new post-war anomaly
They never were that, there literally were fossilmons in gen fricking 1. The original lore was that somehow nobody gave a shit until the 17th century which is preWW2, so was the invention of pokeball (originally) in '25, also preWW2.
>Silver being Giovanni's and his female admin's kid
Silver's mom is unconfirmed.
If it was mentioned offhand in early material and completely ignored in all media until decades later, it is a retcon.
The way anime Pokeballs operate for examples, directly contradicts the natural shrinking ability.
You see Pokemon shrinking in animations where they faint and come out of their balls in older and newer games. You can see the Pokemon being small in their Pokeballs in the adventures manga. Finally it was referenced directly in Diamond and Pearl by Lucian in Canalave Library >"I was just reading a collection of observations on Pokémon in the wild. One article addresses the question why Pokémon would go into a Poké Ball. According to this article, this behavior is based on instinct. A weakened Pokémon will curl up tight in an effort to heal itself. The Poké Ball was invented to take advantage of that protective instinct. I imagine we'll see each other again at the Pokémon League. Take care."
In Japanese he even says they "become small" instead of curl up tight. I don't know why you're using the anime as an example when there's a lot of other stuff in it that contradicts the games.
>The way anime Pokeballs operate for examples, directly contradicts the natural shrinking ability.
The anime isn't really a good example because you have to remember that it's a cartoon for toddlers that needs to adhere to a budget and has been airing almost nonstop on a weekly basis since its debut, only stopping for national tragedies or other circumstances out of Pokemon's control.
The reason why Pokemon in the anime are depicted as being sucked up/spat out by turning into red light is entirely for budget reasons, with how often Pokemon are sent out or recalled that it would be agonizing on the budget to constantly animate them shrinking/expanding out of the ball.
Despite this, however, there are a few instances where you see the Pokemon quite literally shrunk down and residing within a Poke Ball, and if you read the Zukan as well as Adventures you'd understand that this isn't a "silly cartoon moment" but a very literal depiction of how a Poke Ball works.
Additionally, the games DID try their best to depict the phenomenon even with their limited fidelity, but because it was never explained directly in the game or its manual, the common trope of "highly advanced gashapon that can compact things to carry them" that's been frequently used in Japanese media (Ultraseven, Dragon Ball, just to name a couple of famous examples) was lost in localization as Nintendo of America didn't bother to localize the Zukan, instead banking entirely on the anime and TCG to lift the supplementary media weights.
To be fair, I think part of the confusion has to be with how the company handles the brand. Like, in their old branding guide they make claims like 'Pokemon are not data' which people take as literal gospel, but then that invalidates existing game concepts like Porygon. It technically is a quote from the direct source but people ignore the context it was stated, where it was intended to simplify the concept for merchandising and easier use of the brand, and view it as canon 'lore'. There's a lot of concepts of the franchise people demand follow a strict definition be followed when one simply doesn't exist in the capacity they demand.
1 month ago
Anonymous
It also doesn't help this is coming from TPCi in a chain of orders that's one big game of international telephone.
Nintendo/GameFreak/Creatures give TPC the information they need for the brand, then TPC translates and communicates that information to TPCi, and then TPCi has to further dumb it down for third parties that are creating some form of overseas Pokemon media such as marketing or merchandise.
Plus TPCi isn't exactly known for being too caring about getting the overseas market up to speed on what NoA didn't tell them about prior, they were perfectly content to continue ignoring the fact Pokemon shrink and handwave it as "a silly abstraction" until Legends: Arceus forced them to directly translate and localize an excerpt about shrinking as the literal act of shrinking, and the next thing you know the internet's ablaze from a "sudden retcon" out of nowhere.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Oh yeah, that doesn't help either. Prior to that shrinking localization, I had heard something of it mentioned years before from a rough translation of something from Gen 1, but I just assumed it was forgotten early lore, like all the stuff with Celadon University, since (at least in the West) nothing capitalized on it. It was a shock to see that brought up again after all these years.
Pic related is something similar, a translation of Promotional Material for HGSS (maybe even GSC?) where Professor Elm discusses a discovery about eggs that totally changes how people should perceive them. For the life of me, I cannot find the original Japanese promotional letter again, but it is out there - just like the Celadon University brochure eventually got uploaded.
1 month ago
Anonymous
The pic is from Gen 2 promotion, where they explained egg lore.
1 month ago
Anonymous
I really wish there was a better hub for extended Pokemon content. There's so much cool stuff just thrown to the wayside.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Sadly, there's no demand for such a thing.
People would rather circlejerk around the same misinformed points instead of properly documenting things.
We should all be ashamed by the fact the gen 1 zukan only recently started to be known in the west(not that it was big in Japan either).
1 month ago
Anonymous
I-it was big enough in Japan for them to laugh at our confusion and uproar over PLA formally revealing in the games that Pokemon shrink...
1 month ago
Anonymous
Shrinking had other sources though. It was mentioned by Lucian and Alola's MC mom.
I don't know if I would say there isn't a demand, but the whole modern internet doesn't really mesh with fansites the way it used to. If some Western Site started hosting old Pokemon promotional material and had it readily available for reference, I worry that TPCi would give them a cease and desist.
Literally read this thread. People don't give a shit about the actual official content.
1 month ago
Anonymous
I don't think one thread on /vp/ is a salient sample size, but to each their own I suppose.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Lucian
Only in the original JP Script. NoA botched the localization and interpreted it as metaphorically shrinking by "curling up" rather than literal. >Alola Mom
Would you mind giving the exact quote so I can look into it? Bulbapedia's quotes page doesn't have anything about Pokemon shrinking and I'm not about to scrape through the script dump without an idea of what to search for.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Only in the original JP Script.
It doesn't literally say "shrink", fair enough, but it makes it clear there's an instinctual protection pokemon use that pokeballs utilize, which is part of what people find amusing about shrinking.
Shit, no wonder Pomf didn't have it, they only have demo lines and SM lines.
Cheers for the clarity and source.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Dragon Balls GT have been retconned by Super.
1 month ago
Anonymous
I don't know if I would say there isn't a demand, but the whole modern internet doesn't really mesh with fansites the way it used to. If some Western Site started hosting old Pokemon promotional material and had it readily available for reference, I worry that TPCi would give them a cease and desist.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>We should all be ashamed by the fact the gen 1 zukan only recently started to be known in the west
Late > Never, but it is still disappointing that it took so long. You would think with a franchise this big and extremely popular that something like this would've been done in 2000 during the height of Pokemania like how there was info for the extra material for the first 2 movies and the radio dramas that barely anyone talks about now.
I don't know if I would say there isn't a demand, but the whole modern internet doesn't really mesh with fansites the way it used to. If some Western Site started hosting old Pokemon promotional material and had it readily available for reference, I worry that TPCi would give them a cease and desist.
I've never seen that design for the Safari Ball before, it looks cool. Wouldn't mind seeing that in the games. >the whole modern internet doesn't really mesh with fansites the way it used to. If some Western Site started hosting old Pokemon promotional material and had it readily available for reference, I worry that TPCi would give them a cease and desist.
I hate modern internet.
First of all, closed capsules can, being small won't save them from those, and second, shrinking is said to be a reflex, an instinct when they faint, it's not something pokemon do on a whim just like that.
Like the other guy said, Pokemon isn't Marvel and pokemon aint Antman
since when has it ever been canon that pokémon can shrink besides them going into poké balls? this sounds like some ridiculous fan theory completely made up based on, presumably, a grossly misinterpreted throwaway line, like the imagination/multiverse theory for SV was. you probably just got baited by a shitposter, because nobody actually believes this, least of all the devs.
It was actually discussed all the way back in the 90s like in the Pokemon Encyclopedia
I don't know if I would say there isn't a demand, but the whole modern internet doesn't really mesh with fansites the way it used to. If some Western Site started hosting old Pokemon promotional material and had it readily available for reference, I worry that TPCi would give them a cease and desist.
A few different Japanese materials discuss it, and generally the story is consistent where they were experimenting on a Primate and drugged it to the point of near-death, where it began to curl up into a fetal position and shrink. And seeing that process, they used some of the research and used it in the production of more modern Pokeballs. Essentially, the Pokeballs trigger the Pokemon into biologically responding through electric stimuli (trainers have been hit with the beam, and say they feel like it 'zaps' them)
No like, if they can shrink, then how the hell can shit like cages hold them?
Why aren't they using this ability to dodge attacks or hide?
It's implied not to be something they can innately perform. It just triggers at the point of a specific point of exhaustion (partially meant to explain why you can't find Pokemon in a field after knocking them out). Some speculate that attacks like Minimize incorporate the same biological components, but that's just fan interpretation. But when a Pokemon does faint, and shrink, that's it. It's not like they roll around as tiny creatures, when they get the strength to re-awaken, they uncurl into their regular size.
Obviously there are come caveats with this, but this is essentially beta lore that got incorporated as a way to hand-wave questions about gameplay they didn't want to actually design a solution for. It doesn't make a lot of sense, especially with modern lore, but earlier material stated that Pokemon research wasn't even more than a century old and Pokemon just kind of appeared one day and replaced regular animals and that was already being retconned before the anime hiatus from the Porygon incident.
Additionally, the games DID try their best to depict the phenomenon even with their limited fidelity, but because it was never explained directly in the game or its manual, the common trope of "highly advanced gashapon that can compact things to carry them" that's been frequently used in Japanese media (Ultraseven, Dragon Ball, just to name a couple of famous examples) was lost in localization as Nintendo of America didn't bother to localize the Zukan, instead banking entirely on the anime and TCG to lift the supplementary media weights.
Pokemon shrinking was made known in a book published by Creatures 2 months after red and green released in Japan.
Not really a thing in half the games. Shrinking animation is only done in some of them. Other times it's just falling down or energy.
[...]
The first game literally has the space shuttle Columbia and an oldman remembering seeing the Moon landing with his first color TV he bought just for that event. Pokemon has never EVER been in a post-apocalyptic future, it has been the present of our world but with Pokemon since the beginning.
. Play the games yourself anbd pay attention this time, you moronic little monkey.
>worst
Removing normal animals
Deciding pokemon have always veen a thing instead of a new post-war anomaly >best
Silver being Giovanni's and his female admin's kid
This was a good retcon, as the existence of normal animals is redundant. They don't do anything that Pokemon can't and Pokemon would logically drive them to extinction.
>best
gimme a while i gotta think on this one, throw suggestions >worst
multiple timelines, i just find it boring when every other event or possible connections between regions and other story events can just be handwaved as "it just happened in an alternate timeline"
>multiple timeline
not a retcon >when every other event or possible connections between regions and other story events can just be handwaved as "it just happened in an alternate timeline"
This hasn't happened yet.
[...]
A lot of those are retcons? Are you saying because they can justify it in-universe that it doesn't count? Just because they go, "Oh, well this game takes place in a different dimension so technically it's a different reality, so any changes always existed there! But you're also never gonna see that old world ever again, just this new version." Doesn't mean they aren't retroactively changing the continuity. They're just rephrasing it to avoid striking a nerve when the change has the potential of bothering people. Even world-building after the fact can be a retcon if it changes the context of the original experience. But not every retcon is bad.
>A lot of those are retcons?
NTA but not really. The only retcon mentioned here is the removal of real countries references.
And if you force the term a bit, Battle Bond.
Everything else is the fanbase's usual problems with dealing with elementary school level writing.
Personally, I liked how in the anime they used substitute Pokémon for specific fauna/flora until that Pokémon was created, I liked that type of retcon, they didn't feel forced and they enriched the world-building.
The most classic example was Santa's Ponytas, until Stantler was created.
I always wanted them to re-animate Misty's aquarium now populated with pokemon from all regions.
Its clearly stylized to look like a Pokemon.
Not Wailord, but it is something. Maybe he got given some prototype sketches or just was allowed to free-ball it.
Legends Arceus Clefable pokedex: Legend says that on clear, quiet nights, it listens for the voices of its kin living on the moon. I, too, often think of my homeland, so far away.
Fine, let's ignore that it was made by Gamefreak and is listed as a mainline. The last mention of it being from the moon was in Ultra Moon's pokedex. And even so, both Scarlet and Violet dex entries for Cleffa references it being from space/the moon
A lot of those are retcons? Are you saying because they can justify it in-universe that it doesn't count? Just because they go, "Oh, well this game takes place in a different dimension so technically it's a different reality, so any changes always existed there! But you're also never gonna see that old world ever again, just this new version." Doesn't mean they aren't retroactively changing the continuity. They're just rephrasing it to avoid striking a nerve when the change has the potential of bothering people. Even world-building after the fact can be a retcon if it changes the context of the original experience. But not every retcon is bad.
How is adding Fairy-type not a retcon? It outright changes the lore by changing the practicalities of the world they exist in. It's not like it is just a classification system that changed, because it changes the implications of how the world operates. Why did moves that suddenly not work now have an effect? Or if they always had that effect, why was it inert until someone decided 'Oh Jigglypuff, I think you're a fairy now.'
I don't mind the change, but it is a retcon.
Would you consider Steel and Dark type a retcon also? Magnemite and Magneton are suddenly weak to fighting and Bite suddenly deals double damage against Psychic and Ghost types. Also they were newly discovered in gen 2 but then they have experts of the type in Hoenn that takes place 3 years earlier.
You just explained why it would have to be a retcon. How could it be newly discovered, but people already have history with Steel and Dark-type Pokemon going back decades and centuries? It changing Magnemite and Magneton in the past (with the remakes) also makes it pretty clear it is a retcon. The only way a new type could be introduced would be if it didn't change anything that already existed (whether a Pokemon's type or a move's type) and anything with the type is also brand new. Megas were close to not being a retcon, something that was truly new, but then they added more lore to explain it actually existed in the background the whole time we just didn't see it because ???
Gameplay changes are not retcons, in and of themselves.
Adding new lore is not a retcon. It's new material.
Changing old lore is a retcon.
If a gameplay change does change existing lore, it is a retcon.
If new material changes the context of old lore, it is a retcon.
How is that so hard to grasp? Nothing changes in the lore of the game with graphical changes. Saying, "Jigglypuff has always been a Fairy-type" does change the lore, because it changes the circumstances of events.
So what's the logic, then? You seem to be intimately familiar with the Pokemon franchise to know its lore to a degree that no one else in this thread understands, shouldn't you be explaining these things to do your part in ceasing the spread of misinformation in order to cultivate healthier, more accurate discussion and debate about Pokemon?
So please, do enlighten the thread about the logistics behind such phenomenon as "one day, Magnemite suddenly started keeling over more than usual in response to fire and fighting moves" or how Bite suddenly gained the ability to not only damage ghosts, but also do extra damage.
No I'm just more familiar with what words mean. It has nothing to do with the lore. We agree about the lore, it's just not a fricking retcon.
Gameplay changes are not retcons, in and of themselves.
Adding new lore is not a retcon. It's new material.
Changing old lore is a retcon.
If a gameplay change does change existing lore, it is a retcon.
If new material changes the context of old lore, it is a retcon.
How is that so hard to grasp? Nothing changes in the lore of the game with graphical changes. Saying, "Jigglypuff has always been a Fairy-type" does change the lore, because it changes the circumstances of events.
Cool story, no one is saying this.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>no one is saying this.
That's almost every "retcon" people brought up so far anon.
I don't think one thread on /vp/ is a salient sample size, but to each their own I suppose.
>I don't think one thread on /vp/ is a salient sample size
Every lore thread is like this, I just mentioned this because its evidence in front of you.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Then what the frick does a retcon even refer to? Give me an example of a retcon, because I legitimately think you're just that autistic it makes you feel better to believe, "Pokemon is so good, it never needed a retcon!" What is your definition of a retcon beside 'it changes things, but those aren't technically changes, so not a retcon'
1 month ago
Anonymous
I did not reply to every post in the thread. There are retcons. Those ones weren't.
>no one is saying this.
That's almost every "retcon" people brought up so far anon.
[...] >I don't think one thread on /vp/ is a salient sample size
Every lore thread is like this, I just mentioned this because its evidence in front of you.
No one is saying Jigglypuff has always been fairy type, moron. Real life can't be retconed.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Real life can't be retconed.
Not to the same "God has decreed" degree as fiction, but it's very possible for people to "retcon" history by way of obfuscating information, making it obscure and irrelevant, and then reintroducing your altered version of that information as the "true story" of what happened.
If you're influential enough and no one cares enough to dispute you, your word is as good as gold.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Great. No one is saying this. As I said before, so thanks for wasting both our time circling around until you finally caught up to understanding the conversation where it was an hour ago.
So you refuse to give an answer for what counts as a retcon because you don't have any that your own made-up rules wouldn't disqualify if scrutinized? >Retcon - Noun: (in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events
So yes, even justifying it by saying 'the remakes aren't a retcon, cause it's a new universe!' because it still changes the context of the old games by introducing multiverse concepts into them. I can transfer a Normal-Type Jigglypuff from FRLG upward into Bank, and it becomes a Fairy-Type, despite it not being one before. Or is your justification, "that's a different world, so it experiences it differently!"?
Thats what a retcon means. Which is why those things aren't a retcon. How are you this thick.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Until you give me some examples, all you are doing is going >"NUH-UH, YOU'RE WRONG!"
Because you lack any solid argument beyond that. It's really kind of pathetic. You've had ample opportunity to provide examples, but instead you just respond and whine. Just like I respect your response to this not to include an actual examples of retcons.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Examples of what? Of things that aren't retconed? Do you even know what you're asking for?
1 month ago
Anonymous
So you refuse to give an answer for what counts as a retcon because you don't have any that your own made-up rules wouldn't disqualify if scrutinized? >Retcon - Noun: (in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events
So yes, even justifying it by saying 'the remakes aren't a retcon, cause it's a new universe!' because it still changes the context of the old games by introducing multiverse concepts into them. I can transfer a Normal-Type Jigglypuff from FRLG upward into Bank, and it becomes a Fairy-Type, despite it not being one before. Or is your justification, "that's a different world, so it experiences it differently!"?
1 month ago
Anonymous
Pokemon was always a multiverse franchise, though. The only way you can legitimately fulfill Oak's lifelong dream of having a fully catalogued Pokedex without relying on unintentional glitches is to trade with an alternate version of yourself for Pokemon you're unable to find or obtain.
1 month ago
Anonymous
That's not true, and you know it. In the original games, you are meant to trade with 'others' not yourself from other dimensions. 'Red' within the game serves as an avatar for the player's experience in-game, and limitations in game-play are not the same as defined lore. It wasn't until Gen 4 that Pokemon even began to breach on concepts beyond Space and Time, introducing loose plot points about malleable reality, before later games refined the concept further. And sure, Pokemon has played with the concept since that point, but that's what makes it a retcon.
1 month ago
Anonymous
The anon you're replying to is obviously a moron trying to push his headcanon, but if a single universe wasn't established then there being multiple(at any point later) is not a retcon.
1 month ago
Anonymous
How is introducing a Multiverse not a Retcon, if it changes the lore of the original games? It is additional, new, information that changes the perception of the previous incarnation of events.
Like, the belief of the implication in ORAS that the Universe that the asteroid was being flung to was the Universe from RSE. Whether its true or just fanon, that changes the reality of experience for the old games. It's not going to ever happen in gameplay, but now when you play, you have an understanding that 'in lore, another universe *could* teleport an asteroid on top of us...' because it changed the reality of experience that contained the old game lore due to the implications. I'm not saying it's good or bad, since it's on a case by case basis, but unless it's a sequel that doesn't recontexualize the old, new info is still a lesser retcon.
Examples of what? Of things that aren't retconed? Do you even know what you're asking for?
I clearly asked for 'examples of retcons' but you can't provide any. It doesn't even need to be in Pokemon, just any definitions or examples. But you can't, and won't, because it doesn't support your argument.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>I clearly asked for 'examples of retcons'
Oh, so just make your case for you? Frick off.
1 month ago
Anonymous
By responding, and refusing to add additional information, you are just proving my point that your augment is baseless. But please, continue crying in this thread >"WAH, THAT'S NOT A RETCON!!" because you can't formulate anything substantial to add to the conversation beyond your whining.
1 month ago
Anonymous
You just have no idea what you're arguing about. You're trying to debate pokemon lore, I never even mentioned it. If you weren't so thick headed and stubbornly stupid you'd open your eyes and see what I'm actually saying, but you'd rather shadowbox with ghosts and claim a fake victory over a fake argument some fake person in your head failed to defend.
But, tell you what, I'll allow you to pivot to this completely unrelated thing and change the subject to me talking about pokemon retcons, if you will say "I'm a fricking moron and I don't know what a retcon is, I concede this and I want you to teach me about retcons by giving me examples of it in pokemon."
1 month ago
Anonymous
>How is introducing a Multiverse not a Retcon
By not establishing a single universe at the begining.
>that changes the reality of experience for the old game
Not really?, you were overhyped by poketubers.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>It is additional, new, information that changes the perception of the previous incarnation of events.
This is a moronic, zoomerly definition of retcon that sucks. If this is what a retcon is, then real life has retcons. "Originally my girlfriend was loyal and loved me until they retconned it so she was actually fricking tyrone the whole time". It's babble.
If a character is explicitly said to be an only child early in a series, and then later on has an older brother, that's a retcon. It's not a retcon if they introduce a character's brother and it was never mentioned one way or the other, or if the brother was long-lost.
A retcon is when a fact is changed and there's no in-universe explanation for it. If lies and new information are retcons then the word is meaningless and completely uninteresting.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Real life can't have retcons. Fiction can.
If that happened in a fictional story, that's a retcon.
If it happened in reality, sorry that happened, but I can understand why she'd cheat on you.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Then the idea of a retcon is meaningless and completely uninteresting. If that's the idea of a retcon that you accept then you shouldn't be posting about it. It's not interesting at all to point out that stories introduce new elements and events.
1 month ago
Anonymous
It's not about pointing them out. It's about discussing how these changes thus change the whole product. Sometimes in pointless ways, Sometimes major. If you don't think that's interesting, why are you here?
1 month ago
Anonymous
Oh so polygamy is a retcon now?
1 month ago
Anonymous
Yes anon polygamy is a recon.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>This is a moronic, zoomerly definition of retcon that sucks.
No, it's literally what retcon means. Retcons don't have to change established facts.
1 month ago
Anonymous
When I was growing up, and the average IQ of the internet was much higher, it was taken for granted that a retcon had to change the facts of the universe. There were softer retcons where a bullshit explanation was applied like a coat of paint, or where something was changed but you could stretch your imagination to make it work. It's only in the past ten years that women and moronic children have done what they always do and watered the word down until it means nothing interesting. If a retcon is when we find out a character was lying, or when a character wears a shirt we've never seen before, then we don't need a word for that. That's just what a new installment of a story does.
If you absolutely must you can split it into hard recons and soft recons, but then only hard recons are actually interesting.
It's not about pointing them out. It's about discussing how these changes thus change the whole product. Sometimes in pointless ways, Sometimes major. If you don't think that's interesting, why are you here?
Every new piece of information is a retcon by your standards. If a character says a word they never used before that's a recon because we didn't know they knew that word. You have autism.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>If a retcon is when we find out a character was lying,
If at the time, the story/character was written as if they were telling the truth (because they were), then yes, it's a retcon. It wasn't a lie at the time of writing, but now, retroactively, it is.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>Retcons don't have to change established facts.
1 month ago
Anonymous
It doesn't. It just has to change your perception and understanding of events. If new information is added to an existing (FICTIONAL) world that changes the way the audience would understand the narrative then its still a retcon.
1 month ago
Anonymous
> It just has to change your perception and understanding of events
Every mistery novel ends with a retcon.
1 month ago
Anonymous
You're being pedantic. That's a self-contained narrative giving the reader information with the purpose of conveying the story in a particular way for the sake of experience with the story. The way the information is being unfurled is part of the experience with the story, just like the words the author chose have meaning the literal phrasing. Like using repetition to experience for emphasis or using alliteration to ease or increase tension, depending on the sound. It's all a larger piece.
A retcon is additional information, added or changed after the fact, that then changes the circumstance of understood experiences from the previous engagement.
But let me guess, "Pokemon can't have retcons because it's an ongoing story and any new information is meant to simulate how trainers wouldn't have a full understanding of their world!" But if you want to pretend to believe that, bite me.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>You're being pedantic.
No, I literally applied your definition. The fact that its moronic is your problem.
The key thing I'm getting from this thread is that half you frickers have overlapped your headcanon with actual canon and are taking the games not going along with your fanfiction as "retcons".
The fact that the amount of people who believe the WW2/apocalypse shit is higher than zero is disgusting, this board sucks.
That's every lore thread, yeah.
In another fanbase the thread would discuss actual retcons and whether they were good or bad, but those are just bug words for pokemon fans.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Says the person who refuses to give examples of retcons in Pokemon.
1 month ago
Anonymous
So there's canonically an indefinite amount of Mewtwo roaming around Cerulean Cave, an en masse species of hyper-powerful genetically engineered battle specimens, but you just happened to only find one of them while the rest said "nah, frick you, we're out"?
1 month ago
Anonymous
NTA but pokemon is indeed a video game.
1 month ago
Anonymous
I never said that. I was implying the other 'Red' trainers you trade with aren't literally supposed to be Red, but represent other trainers. Technically, within the actual game of RBY, there is no canon version of Red, because of the type of game Pokemon is with a variety of outcomes controllable by the player. Later games, and supplemental material, just state that Red underwent the same general events the players did (but even they are vague about stuff like Mewtwo, depending on the continuity).
The story events of each game are canon, overall, just not the specifics like your team, amount of defeats, amount of Pokemon caught, etc. If it is something the player has control over, then I don't think you can say for sure what the canon version would be, without something external stipulating what is or isn't canon.
You just have no idea what you're arguing about. You're trying to debate pokemon lore, I never even mentioned it. If you weren't so thick headed and stubbornly stupid you'd open your eyes and see what I'm actually saying, but you'd rather shadowbox with ghosts and claim a fake victory over a fake argument some fake person in your head failed to defend.
But, tell you what, I'll allow you to pivot to this completely unrelated thing and change the subject to me talking about pokemon retcons, if you will say "I'm a fricking moron and I don't know what a retcon is, I concede this and I want you to teach me about retcons by giving me examples of it in pokemon."
Proving my point further. But please, keep whining.
1 month ago
Anonymous
You don't have a point to prove.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>My point is, those were retcons. >I gave examples why. >You said they are not. >I asked why. >You said 'because'. >I said your refusal makes it seem like you don't have an argument. >In response, you ask me to kiss your ass and maybe you'll answer.
I mean, just keep crying if you want to keep posting and have nothing to add.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Because definitions aren't an argument. There is no special combinations of words I can use to convince you that the sky is blue if you think it isn't, it just us. That's all there is to it. That's not what a retcon is, because it just isn't. Objectively. You're trying to pivot to arguing about the lore, as if that's what we disagree on, because you aren't fricking listening to me. And when that failed, you want to pivot to making me defend a retcon, so you can continue to avoid what I've been saying. You've been trying to argue with a ghost this entire time, and you're frustrated that I'm not biting until you face the very first fricking thing I said.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Cool post, still don't see you giving any examples of what a retcon is? It doesn't even have to be lore, if you are so stuck on those terms.
Without the player character to set the game's story into motion, then technically, everything after the title menu is noncanon, because those are the only parts of the game that don't require a player character.
Therefore, canon has been irrelevant from the very beginning. Pokemon is a game about a title screen featuring sprites of monsters with a noncanon JRPG campaign beyond it.
That's why I said the story-events are canon. There is a trainer going on his adventure, just not a 'player' character. He exists not any choices you make. You don't have to be pedantic about the scope of it, when you know what I meant. That's any game with concrete lore that gives the player option. There is a canon story by the devs for the sake of understanding, but you can bend it in gameplay to your will, but anything concrete that cannot change is more than likely going to be canon to the 'official' plot of the games.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Correct, you still do not see me talking your bait to change the subject. Thats upsetting you, and I don't care.
1 month ago
Anonymous
It's not my fault you're just a bot who only knows how to reorganize text without being able to come up with a free thought to advance the conversation. The topic is 'discuss retcons' but you keep making the thread about me? Why not discuss some retcons and offer up some examples? Or is that too hard for a bot like you to hallucinate?
1 month ago
Anonymous
I have plenty of free thoughts. I have chosen to not share them with you, to avoid giving you a change of subject to grasp on to. You may hear them, after you face and answer to the first fricking thing that I said. Is this the first time in your life someone has held you accountable?
1 month ago
Anonymous
What the frick are you even talking about? I am trying to talk about Pokemon Retcons, the topic of the thread? You really talk like a bot just regurgitating at response text. What does this even have to do with the thread?
1 month ago
Anonymous
My very first post ITT was listing "retcons", and saying that that's not what a retcon is. You've responded by saying I'm wrong, and then instead of defending it, trying to change the subject three separate times, and accusing me of losing for not changing the subject. I will talk about something else after you answer to your first claim, you fricking moron.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Oh, so it's just a semantics argument? That's really pathetic.
If you're really that ass-blasted mad, I'll concede that I'm not going to go through that whole list and defend every retcon. I simply do not care enough. But asking you to explain why you don't think those are retcons, and asking you to explain why, isn't changing the subject - it's adding to the conversation. I wanted to know why you had that opinion and asked you about it, giving my perception and you went hog wild with all this philosophical mumbjo jumbo, which is why I accused you of being a bot. But my guy, your thoughts really aren't that special or cool to hold on to like gold? Why even come here just to dismiss others and then refuse to participate in the conversation?
If you don't think those are retcons, that's a cromulent and you're allowed to think that, but have something to add to the conversation beyond. "No! You're wrong because I'm right! But you're not worthy of my opinions." makes you look sad. But I'm done even responding to you, I'm just gonna go back to having fun and talking about Pokemon.
1 month ago
Anonymous
You're still not understanding this at all, and it annoys me how stupid you are. You don't need to go through the whole list and defend each one, our disagreement is not on the subject matter. If you could fricking read, you'd know I said that about 5 times now. If I had said "That's not what happened, so it doesn't count as a retcon", you mightve had an argument. But I didnt. There is nothing philosophical about anything I've said, I only said that's not what a retcon is, and I never needed to make another point but you refused to address that. I've had nothing on topic to respond to. And the only one refusing to participate in the conversation is you, running like mad from me and insisting on changing the subject.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Yes, but if they aren't alternate versions of yourself from other universes/timelines, you have to justify how they have the Pokemon they have. And because Mewtwo is an option those trainers can have, you subsequently need to justify the existence of multiple Mewtwo in one set world that does not involve spacetime frickery.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Why? It's just an oversight in gameplay. Gameplay limitations don't need to dictate canon. If your Red isn't technically canon to the event, why would the other trainers? No player character in any game is canon.
1 month ago
Anonymous
Without the player character to set the game's story into motion, then technically, everything after the title menu is noncanon, because those are the only parts of the game that don't require a player character.
Therefore, canon has been irrelevant from the very beginning. Pokemon is a game about a title screen featuring sprites of monsters with a noncanon JRPG campaign beyond it.
Magneton, Nosepass and Charjabug being able to evolve with a Thunder Stone was a nice change so they no longer felt obligated to include an area with a "special magnetic field" in every single region. Would've been even cooler if they went the extra mile and said ALL Pokemon that evolve with Thunder Stones can now additionally evolve when leveled up in one of those areas since the implication is that Thunder Stones now overlap with those fields.
>This thread is a living proof that TPCi don't have any fricking idea on how to handle their own IPs and assets consistently.
Also proof Satoshi Tajiri is dead. How the frick can they sideline the creator of this series like this? They always say he’s living a private life but no one really knows what the frick is going on.
I know this is a thread about retcons, but now I'm interested in getting into the conspiracy theories. When would you say it happened and who went after him and why?
>I know this is a thread about retcons, but now I'm interested in getting into the conspiracy theories. When would you say it happened and who went after him and why?
Either he: >sold all or most of his gamefreak shares at one point, causing him to not have any power over his studio; hence why this series is being directed by other people >got institutionalized or went to jail, whether naturally or by “force” >died of unknown causes, again either natural or odd circumstances
You’re telling me in all of Japan, we don’t know where this man is? No recent pictures since him holding that one Pikachu doll and that one candid photo of him in a suit. We haven’t heard from the man since his opinion on how pokemon’s Special manga supposedly was the way he wanted to depict Pokémon all his life. Why is Ishihara, Masuda, and others allowed to talk about this series but he isn’t? This whole thing is super fricking weird
>This was a massive red flag
Frick if I know that was what he said, that’s what the manga added back then and it could’ve just been his way for it getting traction
Sometimes ideas just don't work out in practice. Like Captain America's cringeworthy and out of character "Commie Smasher" era that was retconned into his iconic backstory of being frozen and the "Commie Smasher" being an insane imposter.
Most retcons are for the better as they're removing stuff that was either always stupid (Ash Greninja) or superseded by superior canon. I much prefer Pokemon's world being distinct from our own (different countries/geography and "regular" animals not being a thing). Makes it feel more interesting.
Yes, Jimmies. Those are all retcons. That's why we are here. Gen 2 is the start of all retcons because why would Mew gave birth to Mewtwo if legendaries can't breed and Pokemon can only lay eggs?
>Worst
Real world entities (animals, places, references) etc, infinite use TMs splitting in gen8 with TRs only to then get rid of them outright in gen9 while also diminishing the movepools of shitmons specifically, & the few QoL improvements that flake off with every new gen.
>Best
Bullshit evo methods that just get replaced by Stone evos, one of the only times where the ever so tired multiverse trope(s) actually make sense due to everyone having their own unique adventure, Typing additions like Magneton+all the Fairy changes.
>The only one that actually matters
Picrel as frick, ferment in rancid piss TrashGren
hoenn's entire mythos being retconned into mega wanking still pisses me off. now hoenn will never be able to stand on its own in the future and will always be tied to XY and "the mystery of mega evolution" rather than its original, simple yet effective, earth sea and sky theming. it's obnoxious, it was always obnoxious, and even now that i'm not mad about megas as a concept i'm still mad about what they did to hoenn's place in pokémon lore, because it's so fricking obnoxious.
The key thing I'm getting from this thread is that half you frickers have overlapped your headcanon with actual canon and are taking the games not going along with your fanfiction as "retcons".
The fact that the amount of people who believe the WW2/apocalypse shit is higher than zero is disgusting, this board sucks.
This description is way too generous. A retcon isn't a storytelling technique, it's a failure that arises from a lack of proper planning and at its worst can cause a loss of confidence in anything in the story mattering.
There's three types of retcons.
The first is when the writer just messed up earlier on and has to contradict previously established plot points to keep the story going. This isn't a story building technique, it's connecting a firehose to the hydrant before the house has completely burned down.
The second is when the writer accidentally or deliberately contradicts the established story because they either forgot details or just don't give a frick about consistency. This isn't a technique, this is just bad writing.
The third is when the writer changes internal plans for a point that's been mentioned in the story but is still vague enough that it can go in another direction without actually contradicting what was established. This is the rarest type and the only form of retcon that's an actual storytelling technique.
No form of retcon is bad writing. There's retcons that add things to the story without contradicting anything that was previously established, retcons that alter the story, and retcons that subtract things from the stories.
None of these are inherently good or bad, it all lies in the execution.
>No form of retcon is bad writing.
A violation of story consistency is obvously bad writing. It something written before can be changed, what reason is there to think the rest of it or even the story currently being told means anything? The writer might just throw it out too.
Retcons are something a good writer ideally avoids.
Mew being the ancestor of ALL Pokemon. We now have Arceus who was born before the universe as well as the creation trio and lake trio who were created shortly afterwards by Arceus. Although seeing as Pokedex entries after gen 4 still says Mew is the ancestor of all Pokemon and possesses the genetic code of all Pokemon it's not been completely retconned, but I doubt GF would ever say Mew came before Arceus.
You're looking at time linearly. Mew birthed the egg containing Arceus and had Celebi take it back in time to before Mew existed, so that Arceus could create the reality that Mew would later inhabit to allow it to birth Arceus.
>best
Idk if you could call it a retcon but moving away from the original idea of Pokemon existing in the normal world and it's just a new type of beetle fighting was a good move. I doubt it would have been half as popular otherwise. Also dropping the "Pokemon just started existing and we keep finding new ones" thing was a good move too.
I doubt changing Johto to Kansai, Hoenn to Kyuushu, Sinnoh to Hokkaido etc. would impact the popularity of the series one bit. And no one seemed to mind there being real fish, worms, mongooses in the anime
Retcon is usually seen as negative so of course people try to downplay them. For me i dont really think for example fairy type is a retcon. Its just a new change.
No part of the term "retcon" implies anything negative. Retcons don't have a negative reputation, bad retcons do.
And "new additions" are by definition retcons if the story and characters behave as if those things were always there. It's like introducing a new character, but the existing characters already know them and act like they've always been there. That's a retcon.
There being more than 151 Pokemon
New Pokemon not being newly discovered
Gym Leaders holding back against challengers because their job is to test them
>Bad retcons
"Alternate universes" being introduced as an in-universe explanation for retcons instead of just letting them be retcons
Hard to say because most actual retcons happen at a gameplay standpoint and moreover the mechanics and plot typically revolves around a non-linear continuity.
A retcon can only really exist if we can confirm that two games exist in the same universe which would mean the only actual retcons that can be 100% confirmed are the differences between the first gen and second gen (ex: Pokemon have a special defense stat, Pokemon can be shiny).
Existing in "different universes" doesn't make it not a retcons, that's just an explanation for the retcons.
For example, all ORAS did was write the pre-Gn 6 games off as an alternate timeline where AZ never created his weapon and thus Mega Evolution never came to exist.
But Gen 6 onwards have all been in the same timeline. The pre-Gen 6 timeline is now basically invalid as there will never be another game taking place in it.
different official universes = different official continuities
different official continuities = no retroactive continuity to modify
This is all of the time I am going to spend on this matter at this point, it's not really a worthwhile conversation as it is because morons will still say things like "gens that I don't like aren't canon" as if it's some grand insult.
Actually instead of shitflinging I will actually address something that does require some form of address or retcon: Pokedex numbers
The so-called first Pokedex that was ever made in canon through the eyes of the player was the PLA dex. It makes no sense, unless explained through a contemporary listing or in HOME universe refactoring, that the National Dex starts with Bulbasaur given what we know about the dex. It should be refactored and start with Rowlet, since the first ever Pokedex in at least the current timeline of SV also starts with Rowlet.
Refactoring would also allow Nidoran to properly be set as species differences in gender as opposed to completely different species. Nidorino/rina can still be set as separate species.
Without the refactor of the National Dex, it implies that species are not discovered but rather categorized by which region actually compiles and submits this grand refactoring process first with their regional dexes (effectively getting all of the "new" Pokemon in a region in the eyes of the player) being the later entries.
The Pokedex was likely a regional thing until Oak. Oak specialized in the Pokedex (every professor has a specialty) so he spent his life building the national dex. Because it was Oak, and he's from Kanto, that's probably why it starts with Kanto Pokemon. He decided to put his home region first before everyone else because he created the Oak standard for the national dex. Like, this is fan canon sure, but all the pieces are there and acknowledged in the series to be fair. It takes less than a few mental steps to reach these conclusions.
For example, all ORAS did was write the pre-Gn 6 games off as an alternate timeline where AZ never created his weapon and thus Mega Evolution never came to exist.
Stop spreading misinformation.
>Leafeon is a Grass Stone evo! >Glaceon is an Ice Stone evo!
Frick them for doing this shit. Why the frick couldn't I just evolve an Eevee into Leafeon in Gen1 then, Game Freak? The in world Moss Rock and Ice Rock were a really cool idea and it made those two unique, but they fricked it up because when GF does QoL it only fixes problems that aren't broken.
>Magneton, Probopass, and Vikavolt all evolve with a Thunder Stone!
Same shit as the Eeveelutions. At least the Mystery Dungeon games had the decency to add a "Coronet Stone". Frick GF for taking the absolute laziest fricking option and making them all Thunder Stone evos.
>Azurill Gender Bullshit.
I know this one was a mistake from the start, and it really is kind of a nothing burger issue, but they fricking honored it for like 4 generations before they randomly went backsies on it. I hate that.
>Affection and Friendship are now the same thing!
This is also an Eeveelution related issue. I fricking hate that so many of these come back to that little shit. Fricking affection and Friendship should have never been separate if they were going to be merged like 2 generations later. What was even the point?
Outside of this? Some changed shiny colors annoy the piss out of me. Or that shit where GF decides to swap the shiny and normal color schemes of some Pokemon for seemingly no reason. And all this is obviously not even bringing up some of the more common issues (national dex, all the removed moves, etc).
>Azurill Gender Bullshit >I know this one was a mistake from the start, and it really is kind of a nothing burger issue, but they fricking honored it for like 4 generations before they randomly went backsies on it
They probably didn't even realize it was there, they "fixed" it by accident by changing how gender is determined. Azurill and Marill STILL to this day have different gender rates which makes zero sense
We need more serious healing Pokemon. Blissey and Audino have big booties and it means their niche is basically just staying in and stalling, but they're clearly meant to be healers. Give us more healing moves. Give us something that isn't Revival Blessing that can just heal dealt damage for fricks sake. And I know there are moves like heal pulse, but I'm looking for something that affects Pokemon in the bag.
This isn't a retcon issue so much as a general continuity issue. There are so many acknowledgements in universe of Pokemon healing other Pokemon and people, why the frick does that not translate to battle stuff? Logistically, if a Pokemon can heal others, it should be able to heal Pokemon not on the field, right?
Every game since Gen 1 has had retcons. Gen 2 starts by pretending we just discovered 80 new Pokemon and 2 new types that someone their neighbors who are in the internet age haven't even heard of.
The Forces of Nature were always shown as a trio and the anime and manga also made sure they were emphasised to be a trio, so wasn’t it weird that Legends Arceus suddenly introduced Enamorus, the fourth member of the “trio” with no foreshadowing or any hints that she existed at all before that game
sometimes I wonder if enamorus was always supposed to exist, but some changes in plans happened, like maybe they couldn't figure a type for it
I say this because the therian forms happened mid gen 5, so it was at least partly always intended for them to have those forms, and since they were based off of a quartet of chinese figures, a fourth one was inevitable
Gen 5 being good
removing real-world references such as indian elephants being shocked to death was probably the worst retcon, i liked when pokemon was implied to be a post-nuke thing and these weird creatures just existed with regular animals.
i'm not gonna count beta stuff nor scrapped movie ideas (like the fricking t-rex fossil movie) as retcons, but the nuke allegories only get bigger with them. i can at least say that i'm glad it wasn't so in-your-face like in the final release
>pokemon was implied to be a post-nuke thing
This never happened
beta things counts too?
I like good post-apocalypse ideas, and have the same idea. Pokemon takes place in the further future, which is why concepts are futuristic while underdeveloped because of new animal dependence.
The first game literally has the space shuttle Columbia and an oldman remembering seeing the Moon landing with his first color TV he bought just for that event. Pokemon has never EVER been in a post-apocalyptic future, it has been the present of our world but with Pokemon since the beginning.
Honestly pokemon existing with animals is just a goated idea like it makes them so much cooler
Mew being indigenous to South America was kino
Does it say the same thing in japanese though?
Asshfrog recton. Frick the anime and it's obtuse manchildren of stalkers.
>”The Lightning Lieutenant!”
Soulless
Soul
Panel 4, the book.
Panel 2, behind the TV.
>that Misty
Should just be "the lighting Unovian"
Surge's nationality was retconned from American to "it doesn't matter" so no, they couldn't call him the Lightning Unovan.
Fairy type
It would never had been such a fake problem if it was introduced in Gen3/4/5
The only problem i have with fairy type is that it counters offensive types and is only weak to two defensive ones. It made the metagame more defensive
I guess that this was a kneejerk reaction from GF part towards the offensive and weather centric gen5 competitve metagame
Fairy should be mutually ineffective against Normal, just like Normal and Ghost are immune to eachother.
Fairy should be weak to Normal to balance both types. Normal is a broken offensive type in Inverse Battles as nothing resists it.
>inb4 Inverse Battle is a Gen 6 gimmick and doesn't exist anymore
Maybe it should be brought back. It's fun.
Possibility 1: Backlash from the Kalos Arc in the anime. Unlikely since it was introduced to the games after it happened.
Possibility 2: It was too strongly tied to Ash, so either there was no point in having it any longer if Ash was retiring or they wanted to not have Ash in the games outside of indirect easter eggs.
Possibility 3: Bond was basically Mega Evolution with a different name exclusive to only 1 Pokemon. Maybe parts of Ash-Greninja will be retconned into Legends Z-A's Mega Greninja if it gets one.
>until ORAS
>until BW. ORAS was when your favorite poketuber told you so.
Wasn't BW's only in an optional side quest for an item unlike ORAS where it was in the main story?
It's amazing how the only actual retcon mentioned in this thread is the removal of real world references.
Pokemon fans are truly special.
>Wasn't BW's only in an optional side quest for an item unlike ORAS where it was in the main story?
ORAS's was in the post game quest. And BW still came out prior so that was the introduction.
Regardless of your opinion on shrinking, it has been around since the beggining, so not a retcon.
>Deciding pokemon have always veen a thing instead of a new post-war anomaly
They never were that, there literally were fossilmons in gen fricking 1. The original lore was that somehow nobody gave a shit until the 17th century which is preWW2, so was the invention of pokeball (originally) in '25, also preWW2.
>Silver being Giovanni's and his female admin's kid
Silver's mom is unconfirmed.
I won't argue the fossils, as a kid I just figured they were an accident.
But Ariana literally has red hair with the same sticking up hair floof points that Silver has.
Yes, and?
>If it was mentioned offhand in early material and completely ignored in all media until decades later, it is a retcon.
It wasn't ignored though. And if it was introduced early its not a retcon.
It contradicting your favorite poketuber headcanon doesn't change anything.
>The way anime Pokeballs operate for examples
You mean the ones Ash uses to carry the clearly-larger-than-a-hand Charizard with?
weak against bug = solved
It was an overreaction of the Gen 4 and 5 meta post Physical/Special Split.
Defensive Pokemon in Gen 3 and back could just be bulky. Reliable healing was not a baseline requirement to be a defensive mon, because your weaknesses could be entirely absent from one side of the physical/special split. There was no way to hit, Skarmory or Milotic super effective on the physical side, nor a way to hit Ludicolo or Blissy super effective on the special side. That means mixed attackers were really the only way to be a true wall breaker, and they inherently had more weaknesses because their stats were spread so thin.
Come Gen 4, and defense borderline does not exist anymore. Your game state is considered advantageous if you are down a mon with Stealth Rocks, because your offensive pressure just got better. Then with non-legendary permanent weather in Gen 5, and defense completely collapsed.
So, Gen 6 added Fairy, a great defensive type that requires traditional defensive types to answer to, and insanely upscaling massive defensive abilities to provide defensive pokemon free resources, like Unaware or Regenerator.
Now, even though the defense and offense is more even than gen 4 or 5, defense is so much more annoying to deal with, since they don't have to work to recover or try to squeeze in Encore/Haze/Roar user to ignore a set up sweeper. They just get all that shit for free.
>Come Gen 4, and defense borderline does not exist anymore
...and that's a good thing!
>It was an overreaction of the Gen 4 and 5 meta post Physical/Special Split.
>Defensive Pokemon in Gen 3 and back could just be bulky. Reliable healing was not a baseline requirement to be a defensive mon, because your weaknesses could be entirely absent from one side of the physical/special split. There was no way to hit, Skarmory or Milotic super effective on the physical side, nor a way to hit Ludicolo or Blissy super effective on the special side. That means mixed attackers were really the only way to be a true wall breaker, and they inherently had more weaknesses because their stats were spread so thin.
>Come Gen 4, and defense borderline does not exist anymore. Your game state is considered advantageous if you are down a mon with Stealth Rocks, because your offensive pressure just got better. Then with non-legendary permanent weather in Gen 5, and defense completely collapsed.
>So, Gen 6 added Fairy, a great defensive type that requires traditional defensive types to answer to, and insanely upscaling massive defensive abilities to provide defensive pokemon free resources, like Unaware or Regenerator.
>Now, even though the defense and offense is more even than gen 4 or 5, defense is so much more annoying to deal with, since they don't have to work to recover or try to squeeze in Encore/Haze/Roar user to ignore a set up sweeper. They just get all that shit for free.
interesting
may be useful
why did you greentext his entire post?
>Fairy type…
…should’ve been introduced earlier. Clefairy/Clefable, Jigglypuff/Wigglytuff, Togepi/Togetic, etc. being Normal type never made any sense to me (nor did I think any other type currently existing fit them). Fairy was the perfect type for filling in that obvious gap. My only major complaint about Fairy is that it should only resist Dragon instead of being immune. Also, it shouldn’t resist Bug.
Neither of these were ever established.
>Artifiicial mons like Voltorb or Porygon existing in the distant past (PLA)
So, you never played the game. Porygon, Magnemite, etc. is exclusively found in space-time distortions where Pokemon from the future are brought to the past. Voltorb has a regional form and is not artificial in PLA.
Not a retcon, been this way since Gen 1 simply because of version exclusives.
I don’t hate this.
>Neither of these were ever established
So you’re telling me that Oak in RBY says his dream is to make a complete pokedex of all the Pokemon in the world and then gives pokedexes to Red and Blue to complete it for him but just leaves it at 151 slots to fill for no reason? Keep in mind that Oak is the lead researcher of Pokemon in the world and is friends with Rowan, Elm, and has a cousin in Alola yet he doesn’t know that there are more Pokemon out there?
nta but you could spin that as "he wants to make a complete pokedex but first starts by making a purely regional dex so the child that he's giving it to that definitely isn't going to leave kanto won't get overwhelmed by the sheer numbers"
the idea is probably that Oak is outsourcing the pokedex to other regions to fill in the rest, which is why every other professor seems to have an identically named device with an identical function to the original
>So you’re telling me that Oak in RBY says his dream is to make a complete pokedex of all the Pokemon in the world and then gives pokedexes to Red and Blue to complete it for him but just leaves it at 151 slots to fill for no reason?
So you're telling me that you can get a certificate for completing the dex even if you have 150 even though there is record of 151 being present? Anyway, yes. The world is whatever is known, he couldn't have known what wasn't known. It's that simple.
>>XY: Lucario is the first known Pokemon to mega evolve
>>ORAS: actually is Rayquaza
They never say this. The meeting of humanity and Rayquaza marked the beginning of the Draconid clan's duty to pass down the lore and Zinnia's gran says that in doing so it was just the mechanism for mega evolution that was discovered. Don't believe everything you read on Bulbapedia.
>For example, all ORAS did was write the pre-Gn 6 games off as an alternate timeline where AZ never created his weapon and thus Mega Evolution never came to exist.
They never did this either. Mega Evolution is perfectly capable of existing in RSE which they said in ORAS with the infinity energy subplot too. The lorewank is just another spin on the same multiversal shit that's been in the series since forever and plot-wise since BW.
>Neither of these were ever established.
Sycamore quite literally states that the Mega Evolution phenomenon has only been witnessed in Kalos during XY. Whether ORAS takes place before or after that game it doesn't matter, because surely the lead authority on Mega Evolution would notice when several trainers in another region are openly using it, INCLUDING THE CHAMPION.
>Sycamore quite literally states that the Mega Evolution phenomenon has only been witnessed in Kalos during XY.
Not true.
>It’s only a hypothesis, but I think the bond between Pokémon and Trainer is the key to this new Evolution. But what is this bond, exactly? And why are there examples of
Mega Evolution only in the Kalos region? There’s still so much we don’t know...
Key word is example:
>a person or thing regarded in terms of their fitness to be imitated or the likelihood of their being imitated.
And according to ORAS, we know that the Ultimate Weapon was what led to the discovery of Mega Evolution in "this" universe at all. You even have Sycamore's researchers note the help from other region's experts which is something they directly reference in ORAS.
Don't blame the game for you jumping to conclusions.
>But what is this bond, exactly? And why are there examples of Mega Evolution only in the Kalos region? There’s still so much we don’t know...
This literally proves my point you mongoloid. I didn't say it only EXISTED in Kalos, I said tht it has only been WITNESSED in Kalos, which is fricking absurd given Hoenn has prominent trainers using it on their teams and a whole host of ones unique to the region. Unless ORAS takes place AFTER XY (which is unlikely given the mentions of AZ heavily imply it took place before he found Floette at XY's finale) and the Megas were only recently discovered (also really fricking unlikely given how they're spread around and no one seems surprised at their prescence) it makes no sense.
>I didn't say it only EXISTED in Kalos, I said tht it has only been WITNESSED in Kalos
Which isn't true, given that people in Kalos reference help from other regions in Sycamore's study of megas. You're headcanonning "witnessed" in yourself.
>Which isn't true, given that people in Kalos reference help from other regions in Sycamore's study of megas
Then Sycamore's mentioning that there were only examples in Kalos makes no sense.
>Then Sycamore's mentioning that there were only examples in Kalos makes no sense.
That's a you problem. You don't understand what "examples" means, just like many don't understand what they meant when they said Rayquaza was "the beginning of all" when they were talking about Draconid lore and not mega evolution as a whole.
I don't care about the first Mega you dumbass, I care that Sycamore such a shitty researcher that he was apparently completely ignorant of an entire set of foreign Megas existing and being used by another region. You still haven't explained how he was entirely ignorant of the phenomenon existing elsewhere despite ORAS taking place within close proximity of the XY story btw.
>I care that Sycamore such a shitty researcher that he was apparently completely ignorant of an entire set of foreign Megas existing and being used by another region.
But he's not. There is clearly evidence of them in other regions as indicated by the rest of XY, but Sycamore is concerned with the source, origins, and mechanics of it. Which as he says, there are only examples of in Kalos.
>Sycamore is concerned with the source, origins, and mechanics of it. Which as he says, there are only examples of in Kalos.
There is literally nothing in the statement that indicates that he's more concerned with the origins of the phenomenon in that context than the fact that it's simply being expressed in the first place.
>There is literally nothing in the statement that indicates that he's more concerned with the origins of the phenomenon in that context than the fact that it's simply being expressed in the first place.
Except, that statement doesn't occur in a vacuum.
>Also, I want to ask for your help in solving the Kalos region’s biggest Pokémon mystery: the secret and potential of Mega Evolution
Not Mega Evolution itself, not the existence of Mega Evolution at all. The secret and potential of Mega Evolution.
"The secret and potential of Mega Evolution" is such a ridiculously vague and nebulous "trying to sound profound" nothing statement (many of which litter this series' dialogue when it comes time to discuss lore) that using it to try and prove a point is fricking asinine. If anything, understanding the "secret and potential" of the phenomenon would require actively studying it's direct use and anything even remotely similar when the opportunity arises, which includes the """"incredibly similar""""" phenomenon happening in another region which just so happens to both give off the same energy, have the same requirements, and visually look exactly the same as it does in Sycamore's home region.
>which includes the """"incredibly similar""""" phenomenon happening in another region which just so happens to both give off the same energy, have the same requirements, and visually look exactly the same as it does in Sycamore's home region.
Right, because as we established: Mega Evolution itself isn't exclusive to Kalos, examples of it relating to the secret of its existence are. Meanwhile, other regions are still corroborating Sycamore's research and it's because of the events from Hoenn that his work was propelled forward to what we see in XY.
>Right, because as we established: Mega Evolution itself isn't exclusive to Kalos, examples of it relating to the secret of its existence are.
Once again, his statement made absolutely no reference to the "secret". Even if that statement preceded it, he still posed the question of Mega Evolution only showing examples in Kalos as another one of it's mysteries to be solved. This isn't a mystery, because it HAD been natively expressed in other regions, so this phrasing is, at best, written incredibly sloppily and a prime example of a stupid person trying to write a smart person, or, at worst, a statement that was invalidated by the immediately succeeding game.
>a statement that was invalidated by the immediately succeeding game.
Which doesn't happen. The whole "mystery" of mega evolution is left on a cliffhanger at the end of XY with the sundial. That's immediately addressed in ORAS which sets the framework for the events of XY in a loop.
>Even if that statement preceded it, he still posed the question of Mega Evolution only showing examples in Kalos as another one of it's mysteries to be solved.
Yes. Because as we know from ORAS, the key element of Mega Evolution's discovery was the Ultimate Weapon. The only exemplary cases of Mega Evolution in that context are in Kalos. There is no Ultimate Weapon anywhere else.
>Yes. Because as we know from ORAS, the key element of Mega Evolution's discovery was the Ultimate Weapon.
Once again, the statement was proposed DIVORCED from the idea that it needed to be tied to the secret, as if it was another thing about Mega Evolution that needed to be solved. The implication that he specifically and only meant in the context of it's origin is simply just not there. "The secret of Mega Evolution" is not a phrase that has bearing on "There are only examples of Mega Evolution in Kalos".
This entire conversation is just going in circles, and I have an assignment we need to start soon. We're just gonna have to agree to disagree
It's called context clues, anon. Sycamore's line of research is concerned with one particularly significant aspect about Mega Evolution. That's hammered in the entire game.
There's no one to blame but yourself for not understanding what "examples" means.
>he still posed the question of Mega Evolution only showing examples in Kalos as another one of it's mysteries to be solved.
NTA but you're reading it as
>why is mega evolution exclusive to kalos?
When it's
>why are SOME mega evolutions exclusive to kalos
I wonder what will happen if they do end up remaking BW, the only fairy types in the game would be Cottonee/Whimsicott, and I'm sure GF wouldn't be happy with that so they may decide the Solosis and Gothita lines are now fairy or something
all they'd need to do to get around that issue is just reincorporate the dream world or some equivalent into the main game
the type distribution of the dex doesn't really matter if the player can just get more varies from outside of it
and enamorus would probably also be put into the game unless they stupidly decide that giving all remakes identical dexes should be a thing moving forward, which is dumb
there are only 151 pokemon in the world and mega evolution exclusive in kalos
No longer eating pokemon or consuming pokemon byproducts.
Both of these are canon still in the games
Still happens, they just hide the fact because it's weird to think about. Pokémon has pretty bad and partially obtuse worldbuilding like that.
Fossilmons still being alive today
Artifiicial mons like Voltorb or Porygon existing in the distant past (PLA)
Legendaries being able to evolve, makes zero sense
Porygon is only there due to time distortion
Porygon shouldn't even exist in the wild in the first place
>Fossilmons still being alive today
That’s because people brought fossils back to life, increased the population by breeding new ones and then released them into the wild. Not a retcon.
>Artifiicial mons like Voltorb or Porygon existing in the distant past (PLA)
Voltorb is pretty dumb because they don’t even serve as mimics in PLA and Hisuian Electrode has existed far longer than the pokeball since it’s a Noble Pokemon.
>Legendaries being able to evolve, makes zero sense
No legendary has been retconned into being able to evolve unless you count mega evolution and primal reversion.
this post confirms pokemon fans are the most moronic people on earth
kabuto has always canonically been still alive and the others were canonically reintroduced into the wild by trainers. not a retcon.
Kabuto's dex entry from Silver
>This Pokémon lived in ancient times. On rare occasions, it has been discovered as a living fossil.
them going so far out of their way to outright erase ash-greninja after pushing it so hard is hilarious in a morbid way
what changed to make them not want it around anymore?
>why doesn't my serperior have a supermode???
The Kanto legendaries being in HGSS. I always thought you couldn’t catch them in GSC because Red had already caught them. In HGSS you can visit the same locations as in the Kanto games and catch them which I guess is more content, but I liked the idea that Red has them but just chooses to use his bros instead.
> I always thought
Then its not a retcon.
The Kanto legendaries still being there in HGSS is a retcon from the originals, but my speculation as to why they’re not there in GSC is pretty much headcanon.
The fact that you can catch multiple Articuno, Zapdos and Moltres in LGP/E seems to indicate that they can breed, just not in captivity.
i wonder if that's how it is for like, most legendaries
>some gaylord keeps building the regis and in fact keeps building more kinds of them, and there were in fact multiple regigigas that toted around continents
>kyogre vs. groudon is just super ancient gang wars, the leader of them all was probably whatever managed to get their hands on primal energy
the biggest arguments i can make for only one legendary per timeline would probably be entei, raikou, and suicune, but chances are the pokemon they were before they turned into them are still out there and just needs a ho-oh to sprinkle magic fairy dust on them when they die for some reason
Maybe Regigigas had multiple Registeel/rock/ice before he got locked up. That could explain their multiples at lest.
This can just be put down to Lucario being the first known mega evolution in Kalos and they didn't know about Rayquaza in a region on the other side of the world. Sort of like different countries claim that they had an explorer who found America before Columbus.
Lusamine having her exposure to Nihilego retconned away in USUM leaves so many holes in the story since they tried to keep as many scenes from the base game as they could.
Lusamine had never been exposed to Nihilego's toxins until she bonded with it in Ultra Space. That's how it works
multiple timelines
It's a lazy way to say everything and nothing is canon
This way any inconsistencies can be excused by saying it's another timeline
>It's a lazy way to say everything and nothing is canon
Not really. Try to understand what the concept is.
Its also not a retcon as it was never stated there was a single one.
Retcon doesn't mean contradiction. It was never stated that were multiple timelines until ORAS, so it's retroactive continuity AKA a retcon.
that's not what a retcon is. By that logic anything that is later introduced after the first word of a story is a retcon.
That literally is what a retcon is. Retroactive continuity. Continuity added retroactively.
There's more than one kind of retcon.
>The first is addition. This is a new detail added to give the reader or viewer a new understanding of the story. This detail would not have been planned when a series was first being made
>The second is alteration. This is a detail goes against details already given.
>The third is subtraction. This is a detail that gets ignored or forgotten later in a series.
Goku being an alien is a retcon. Darth Vader being Luke Skywalker's father is a retcon. Alfred raising Batman is a retcon (originally, he wasn't hired until Batman was already an adult).
A retcon does not have to contradict. There are plenty of retcons that simply add new details without contradicting anything that was previously established. Pokemon is full of these kinds of retcons.
"Retcon" would be a useless term if it only applied to contradictions.
Now try saying that outside the pokemon fanbase. Kudos for knowing about Goku, Darth Vader or Batman though.
>"Retcon" would be a useless term if it only applied to contradictions.
Not really, which is why the term was coined in the first place.
Retcon is when you start pretending something always happened that was different. Adding shit to a story is just what the story is supposed to do.
The only retcon you described is Batman's.
>Not really, which is why the term was coined in the first place.
Yes, because we already have a word for contradictions; contradiction.
Retcon means retroactive continuity; continuity that was added retroactively.
>Retcons sometimes do not contradict previously established facts but instead fill in missing background details, usually to support current plot points. This is known as an additive retcons.
Like the other anon, retcons can either add new information without contradicting anything, alter information, or subtract information.
>Yes, because we already have a word for contradictions; contradiction.
No one said retcon and contradiction are the same thing.
>Retcon means retroactive continuity; continuity that was added retroactively.
By changing an established fact about the past.
Otherwise its just continuity.
>Like the other anon, retcons can either add new information without contradicting anything, alter information, or subtract information.
That's just regular story continuity, why do you have to add the "retroactive"?
>Retcon doesn't mean contradiction.
It does, yeah. If a single world wasn't established then there being multiple ones doesn't change a previous statement.
> until ORAS
until BW. ORAS was when your favorite poketuber told you so.
>The Kanto legendaries still being there in HGSS is a retcon from the originals
Not really, like most things mentioned in this thread, is not a retcon, as that wasn't established.
>It does, yeah
RETroactive CONtinuity
Nothing there implies a contradiction
Why do you think the "retroactive" was added to the word "continuity" anon?
Because the information wasn't always planned. The reason Goku being an alien and Vader being Luke's father are retcons is because they weren't originally planned. Goku was just a human kid with a monkey tail (animal people were everywhere in Dragon Ball). Vader is a retcon because Obi-Wan said “A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father.”, which means that at the time of writing A) Darth Vader was his actual name, not a title. and B) Vader and Luke's father were two separate people.
A good exercise for you would be to deal with media outside pokemon. You'll realize that pretty much nothing is planned, which is why most fanbases don't make a big deal about most changes.
The word retcon was for special cases where established aspects were changed. Not when a story was expanded.
>The word retcon was for special cases where established aspects were changed
This has never been the case at all.
Retcon has always applied to anything that expands upon or recontextualizes past events.
The term applies to ANY kind of change to a story, whether it's addition, alteration, or subtraction. Narrowing it down to only refer to contradictions makes the term entirely useless.
>recontextualizes
That sounds like a change happened.
>The term applies to ANY kind of change to a story
Anon, the story changes all the time.
If we were to go by your definition, then Luke destroying the death star would already be a retcon because the death star that was there before is now no more.
How is that not useless?
Retcons do not necessarily mean contradictions. Goku being an alien is a recon. There is nothing to imply he is an alien prior to raditz showing up (because toriyama hadn't thought of it yet) but there's also not anything that proves he's not an alien. However being a saiyan "retroactively" is used to explain aspects of his character.
>Why is Goku so strong?
He comes from a warrior race
>Why does he have a tail?
Saiyan have tails
>Why does he turn into a giant ape at a full moon?
It's a saiyan reaction to the waves emitted by light reflected off the moon.
>How come Goku seems to come back stronger after every defeat
Saiyans biologically power up when coming back from near death.
None of these things really needed explanation but now the explanation is all handled by "he's an alien." It also has the consequence of implying anytime Goku won a rematch it had less to do with training or skill and more to do with biological advantages. But also it bleeds into character traits too.
>Why does Goku like fighting so much
Saiyans naturally love battle.
> Why does Goku eat so much
Saiyans need to eat a lot of food.
>Why is Goku so dopey
Because he had an accident where he bumped his head as a child and became nice.
It's a reveal that not only changes what the story can do moving forward but also how we interpret Goku's character prior to this reveal and on subsequent rereads.
The "blowing up the death star" doesn't change anything about how we interpret the past events of the characters. It doesn't "retroactively" change anything. Its an active change en media res. Proactive continuity.
They removed multiple timelines that makes no sense how does one explain all the continuity without multiple timelines
Better retcons:
>Removing incense as a requirement for pre-evos introduced after Gen 2.
>Allowing evolutions that required special overworld objects or effects to evolve with evolution stones instead
Worse retcons:
>The overall divorce of the Pokemon world being very similar to our real world, but with Pokemon slightly futuristic technology
>Introducing substitute alphabets for text in in-game objects in the worst way possible
I don’t know if this counts but incenses. Snorlax should have just bred Munchlax in Gen IV. Needing a held item or it breeds a fully adult Snorlax is extremely dumb.
>In the future, they do
No they don't
You only give them through gifts and the trophy garden once it's implied its owner put them there
Then Arceus simply pulled them from there. There. Not a retcon.
Why did she do it bros
>Pokemon shrink when threatened or on command to enter Pokeballs
This destroys the universe.
No Pokemon could ever be predated. Why do the Arrowkuda and Pikachu not simply shrink to escape from the Cramorant? Why don't any of the Pokemon in Pokemon Snap not shrink away when threatened? Why don't any Pokemon in Mystery Dungeon do it to survive? No wild Pokemon could ever have been successfully hunted by a human. No lost Pokemon would ever be found if it ran away of its own accord. How many problems would have been solved in the anime if ANY Pokemon had just willingly shrunk down to do something?
Its completely nonsensical.
Pokemon shrinking was made known in a book published by Creatures 2 months after red and green released in Japan.
If it was mentioned offhand in early material and completely ignored in all media until decades later, it is a retcon.
The way anime Pokeballs operate for examples, directly contradicts the natural shrinking ability.
You see Pokemon shrinking in animations where they faint and come out of their balls in older and newer games. You can see the Pokemon being small in their Pokeballs in the adventures manga. Finally it was referenced directly in Diamond and Pearl by Lucian in Canalave Library
>"I was just reading a collection of observations on Pokémon in the wild. One article addresses the question why Pokémon would go into a Poké Ball. According to this article, this behavior is based on instinct. A weakened Pokémon will curl up tight in an effort to heal itself. The Poké Ball was invented to take advantage of that protective instinct. I imagine we'll see each other again at the Pokémon League. Take care."
In Japanese he even says they "become small" instead of curl up tight. I don't know why you're using the anime as an example when there's a lot of other stuff in it that contradicts the games.
>The way anime Pokeballs operate for examples, directly contradicts the natural shrinking ability.
The anime isn't really a good example because you have to remember that it's a cartoon for toddlers that needs to adhere to a budget and has been airing almost nonstop on a weekly basis since its debut, only stopping for national tragedies or other circumstances out of Pokemon's control.
The reason why Pokemon in the anime are depicted as being sucked up/spat out by turning into red light is entirely for budget reasons, with how often Pokemon are sent out or recalled that it would be agonizing on the budget to constantly animate them shrinking/expanding out of the ball.
Despite this, however, there are a few instances where you see the Pokemon quite literally shrunk down and residing within a Poke Ball, and if you read the Zukan as well as Adventures you'd understand that this isn't a "silly cartoon moment" but a very literal depiction of how a Poke Ball works.
Additionally, the games DID try their best to depict the phenomenon even with their limited fidelity, but because it was never explained directly in the game or its manual, the common trope of "highly advanced gashapon that can compact things to carry them" that's been frequently used in Japanese media (Ultraseven, Dragon Ball, just to name a couple of famous examples) was lost in localization as Nintendo of America didn't bother to localize the Zukan, instead banking entirely on the anime and TCG to lift the supplementary media weights.
To be fair, I think part of the confusion has to be with how the company handles the brand. Like, in their old branding guide they make claims like 'Pokemon are not data' which people take as literal gospel, but then that invalidates existing game concepts like Porygon. It technically is a quote from the direct source but people ignore the context it was stated, where it was intended to simplify the concept for merchandising and easier use of the brand, and view it as canon 'lore'. There's a lot of concepts of the franchise people demand follow a strict definition be followed when one simply doesn't exist in the capacity they demand.
It also doesn't help this is coming from TPCi in a chain of orders that's one big game of international telephone.
Nintendo/GameFreak/Creatures give TPC the information they need for the brand, then TPC translates and communicates that information to TPCi, and then TPCi has to further dumb it down for third parties that are creating some form of overseas Pokemon media such as marketing or merchandise.
Plus TPCi isn't exactly known for being too caring about getting the overseas market up to speed on what NoA didn't tell them about prior, they were perfectly content to continue ignoring the fact Pokemon shrink and handwave it as "a silly abstraction" until Legends: Arceus forced them to directly translate and localize an excerpt about shrinking as the literal act of shrinking, and the next thing you know the internet's ablaze from a "sudden retcon" out of nowhere.
Oh yeah, that doesn't help either. Prior to that shrinking localization, I had heard something of it mentioned years before from a rough translation of something from Gen 1, but I just assumed it was forgotten early lore, like all the stuff with Celadon University, since (at least in the West) nothing capitalized on it. It was a shock to see that brought up again after all these years.
Pic related is something similar, a translation of Promotional Material for HGSS (maybe even GSC?) where Professor Elm discusses a discovery about eggs that totally changes how people should perceive them. For the life of me, I cannot find the original Japanese promotional letter again, but it is out there - just like the Celadon University brochure eventually got uploaded.
The pic is from Gen 2 promotion, where they explained egg lore.
I really wish there was a better hub for extended Pokemon content. There's so much cool stuff just thrown to the wayside.
Sadly, there's no demand for such a thing.
People would rather circlejerk around the same misinformed points instead of properly documenting things.
We should all be ashamed by the fact the gen 1 zukan only recently started to be known in the west(not that it was big in Japan either).
I-it was big enough in Japan for them to laugh at our confusion and uproar over PLA formally revealing in the games that Pokemon shrink...
Shrinking had other sources though. It was mentioned by Lucian and Alola's MC mom.
Literally read this thread. People don't give a shit about the actual official content.
I don't think one thread on /vp/ is a salient sample size, but to each their own I suppose.
>Lucian
Only in the original JP Script. NoA botched the localization and interpreted it as metaphorically shrinking by "curling up" rather than literal.
>Alola Mom
Would you mind giving the exact quote so I can look into it? Bulbapedia's quotes page doesn't have anything about Pokemon shrinking and I'm not about to scrape through the script dump without an idea of what to search for.
>Only in the original JP Script.
It doesn't literally say "shrink", fair enough, but it makes it clear there's an instinctual protection pokemon use that pokeballs utilize, which is part of what people find amusing about shrinking.
>https://projectpokemon.org/research/usum/storytext.txt
>If only I could make all these boxes shrink small enough to fit into Poké Balls, like Pokémon do...[VAR 0114(0004)]
Shit, no wonder Pomf didn't have it, they only have demo lines and SM lines.
Cheers for the clarity and source.
Dragon Balls GT have been retconned by Super.
I don't know if I would say there isn't a demand, but the whole modern internet doesn't really mesh with fansites the way it used to. If some Western Site started hosting old Pokemon promotional material and had it readily available for reference, I worry that TPCi would give them a cease and desist.
>We should all be ashamed by the fact the gen 1 zukan only recently started to be known in the west
Late > Never, but it is still disappointing that it took so long. You would think with a franchise this big and extremely popular that something like this would've been done in 2000 during the height of Pokemania like how there was info for the extra material for the first 2 movies and the radio dramas that barely anyone talks about now.
I've never seen that design for the Safari Ball before, it looks cool. Wouldn't mind seeing that in the games.
>the whole modern internet doesn't really mesh with fansites the way it used to. If some Western Site started hosting old Pokemon promotional material and had it readily available for reference, I worry that TPCi would give them a cease and desist.
I hate modern internet.
>something that was canon ever since the beginning is a retcon that destroys the universe
moron alert
There's a reason all Pokemon stories ignore the shrinking stuff, it's because it invalidates any conflict
How? It doesn't make them invulnerable and we've seen Pokeballs get smashed, so it's not like they're automatically protected in there?
>all Pokemon stories
Furaffinity headcanon "stories" aren't canon.
No like, if they can shrink, then how the hell can shit like cages hold them?
Why aren't they using this ability to dodge attacks or hide?
Because cages aren't made from these, aren't they?
>all Pokemon stories ignore the shrinking
Except the canon ones. Also the manga.
>invalidates any conflict
No it fricking doesn't you dipshit
If they can shrink, then literally nothing can touch them or keep them contained
Pokemon is not a Marvel Cinematic Universe, moron
First of all, closed capsules can, being small won't save them from those, and second, shrinking is said to be a reflex, an instinct when they faint, it's not something pokemon do on a whim just like that.
Like the other guy said, Pokemon isn't Marvel and pokemon aint Antman
since when has it ever been canon that pokémon can shrink besides them going into poké balls? this sounds like some ridiculous fan theory completely made up based on, presumably, a grossly misinterpreted throwaway line, like the imagination/multiverse theory for SV was. you probably just got baited by a shitposter, because nobody actually believes this, least of all the devs.
It was actually discussed all the way back in the 90s like in the Pokemon Encyclopedia
A few different Japanese materials discuss it, and generally the story is consistent where they were experimenting on a Primate and drugged it to the point of near-death, where it began to curl up into a fetal position and shrink. And seeing that process, they used some of the research and used it in the production of more modern Pokeballs. Essentially, the Pokeballs trigger the Pokemon into biologically responding through electric stimuli (trainers have been hit with the beam, and say they feel like it 'zaps' them)
It's implied not to be something they can innately perform. It just triggers at the point of a specific point of exhaustion (partially meant to explain why you can't find Pokemon in a field after knocking them out). Some speculate that attacks like Minimize incorporate the same biological components, but that's just fan interpretation. But when a Pokemon does faint, and shrink, that's it. It's not like they roll around as tiny creatures, when they get the strength to re-awaken, they uncurl into their regular size.
Obviously there are come caveats with this, but this is essentially beta lore that got incorporated as a way to hand-wave questions about gameplay they didn't want to actually design a solution for. It doesn't make a lot of sense, especially with modern lore, but earlier material stated that Pokemon research wasn't even more than a century old and Pokemon just kind of appeared one day and replaced regular animals and that was already being retconned before the anime hiatus from the Porygon incident.
oh wow nevermind then, this is actually a pretty solid thing i knew nothing about. color me surprised i guess.
There is a lot of material only available to Japanese fans that recontexualizes a lot of what we know about the series.
I love the cd dramas or whatever they are called
It would be nice to see them animated
Not really a thing in half the games. Shrinking animation is only done in some of them. Other times it's just falling down or energy.
>Play the game.
Neither those anons but
. Play the games yourself anbd pay attention this time, you moronic little monkey.
>worst
Removing normal animals
Deciding pokemon have always veen a thing instead of a new post-war anomaly
>best
Silver being Giovanni's and his female admin's kid
>Removing normal animals
This was a good retcon, as the existence of normal animals is redundant. They don't do anything that Pokemon can't and Pokemon would logically drive them to extinction.
>XY: Lucario is the first known Pokemon to mega evolve
>ORAS: actually is Rayquaza
good. good. screw l*cario
>best
gimme a while i gotta think on this one, throw suggestions
>worst
multiple timelines, i just find it boring when every other event or possible connections between regions and other story events can just be handwaved as "it just happened in an alternate timeline"
>multiple timeline
not a retcon
>when every other event or possible connections between regions and other story events can just be handwaved as "it just happened in an alternate timeline"
This hasn't happened yet.
>A lot of those are retcons?
NTA but not really. The only retcon mentioned here is the removal of real countries references.
And if you force the term a bit, Battle Bond.
Everything else is the fanbase's usual problems with dealing with elementary school level writing.
the ash frog one is an actual retcon though, in the anime at least, they literally showed flashbacks of the same scenes and it was a normal greninja
Nobody gives a frick about the show, it's literally for toddlers.
so are the games...
The games are for all ages, there's an ocean of difference.
It might shock you to know that I'm not OP so I don't give a frick. I wasn't talking about the show.
learn to read you absolutely moronic fricking ape, nowhere in the thread specifies retcons for games only
Personally, I liked how in the anime they used substitute Pokémon for specific fauna/flora until that Pokémon was created, I liked that type of retcon, they didn't feel forced and they enriched the world-building.
The most classic example was Santa's Ponytas, until Stantler was created.
I always wanted them to re-animate Misty's aquarium now populated with pokemon from all regions.
Fun fact, T. Onno's Mangaka created a proto Wailord in his manga for Misty's Gym, before RSE
If you think that's a proto wailord and not just a stylized whale you're the biggest fricking moron in here.
Its clearly stylized to look like a Pokemon.
Not Wailord, but it is something. Maybe he got given some prototype sketches or just was allowed to free-ball it.
>you're the biggest fricking moron in here.
Why the frick red doing a >:3 face
>electric tale
that's ash
Shitmons like clefairy being "WOAH DOOD THEY'RE FROM SPAAAAACE!!!" getting retconned is a good thing.
Legends Arceus Clefable pokedex: Legend says that on clear, quiet nights, it listens for the voices of its kin living on the moon. I, too, often think of my homeland, so far away.
Dex entries in spinoffs aren't canon.
Your mother's marriage isn't canon.
Fine, let's ignore that it was made by Gamefreak and is listed as a mainline. The last mention of it being from the moon was in Ultra Moon's pokedex. And even so, both Scarlet and Violet dex entries for Cleffa references it being from space/the moon
NTA but Gen 7 and Gen 9 aren't canon either.
A lot of those are retcons? Are you saying because they can justify it in-universe that it doesn't count? Just because they go, "Oh, well this game takes place in a different dimension so technically it's a different reality, so any changes always existed there! But you're also never gonna see that old world ever again, just this new version." Doesn't mean they aren't retroactively changing the continuity. They're just rephrasing it to avoid striking a nerve when the change has the potential of bothering people. Even world-building after the fact can be a retcon if it changes the context of the original experience. But not every retcon is bad.
No, I'm saying they're not retcons. There's no technicality or logical leap, that's just not what that fricking word means.
How is adding Fairy-type not a retcon? It outright changes the lore by changing the practicalities of the world they exist in. It's not like it is just a classification system that changed, because it changes the implications of how the world operates. Why did moves that suddenly not work now have an effect? Or if they always had that effect, why was it inert until someone decided 'Oh Jigglypuff, I think you're a fairy now.'
I don't mind the change, but it is a retcon.
Would you consider Steel and Dark type a retcon also? Magnemite and Magneton are suddenly weak to fighting and Bite suddenly deals double damage against Psychic and Ghost types. Also they were newly discovered in gen 2 but then they have experts of the type in Hoenn that takes place 3 years earlier.
You just explained why it would have to be a retcon. How could it be newly discovered, but people already have history with Steel and Dark-type Pokemon going back decades and centuries? It changing Magnemite and Magneton in the past (with the remakes) also makes it pretty clear it is a retcon. The only way a new type could be introduced would be if it didn't change anything that already existed (whether a Pokemon's type or a move's type) and anything with the type is also brand new. Megas were close to not being a retcon, something that was truly new, but then they added more lore to explain it actually existed in the background the whole time we just didn't see it because ???
>Would you consider Steel and Dark type a retcon also?
Yes? You fricking moron?
Because changes are not retcons. Jist like 3d didnt "retcon" sprites. Hope this helps, you fricking moron.
Gameplay changes are not retcons, in and of themselves.
Adding new lore is not a retcon. It's new material.
Changing old lore is a retcon.
If a gameplay change does change existing lore, it is a retcon.
If new material changes the context of old lore, it is a retcon.
How is that so hard to grasp? Nothing changes in the lore of the game with graphical changes. Saying, "Jigglypuff has always been a Fairy-type" does change the lore, because it changes the circumstances of events.
So what's the logic, then? You seem to be intimately familiar with the Pokemon franchise to know its lore to a degree that no one else in this thread understands, shouldn't you be explaining these things to do your part in ceasing the spread of misinformation in order to cultivate healthier, more accurate discussion and debate about Pokemon?
So please, do enlighten the thread about the logistics behind such phenomenon as "one day, Magnemite suddenly started keeling over more than usual in response to fire and fighting moves" or how Bite suddenly gained the ability to not only damage ghosts, but also do extra damage.
No I'm just more familiar with what words mean. It has nothing to do with the lore. We agree about the lore, it's just not a fricking retcon.
Cool story, no one is saying this.
>no one is saying this.
That's almost every "retcon" people brought up so far anon.
>I don't think one thread on /vp/ is a salient sample size
Every lore thread is like this, I just mentioned this because its evidence in front of you.
Then what the frick does a retcon even refer to? Give me an example of a retcon, because I legitimately think you're just that autistic it makes you feel better to believe, "Pokemon is so good, it never needed a retcon!" What is your definition of a retcon beside 'it changes things, but those aren't technically changes, so not a retcon'
I did not reply to every post in the thread. There are retcons. Those ones weren't.
No one is saying Jigglypuff has always been fairy type, moron. Real life can't be retconed.
>Real life can't be retconed.
Not to the same "God has decreed" degree as fiction, but it's very possible for people to "retcon" history by way of obfuscating information, making it obscure and irrelevant, and then reintroducing your altered version of that information as the "true story" of what happened.
If you're influential enough and no one cares enough to dispute you, your word is as good as gold.
Great. No one is saying this. As I said before, so thanks for wasting both our time circling around until you finally caught up to understanding the conversation where it was an hour ago.
Thats what a retcon means. Which is why those things aren't a retcon. How are you this thick.
Until you give me some examples, all you are doing is going
>"NUH-UH, YOU'RE WRONG!"
Because you lack any solid argument beyond that. It's really kind of pathetic. You've had ample opportunity to provide examples, but instead you just respond and whine. Just like I respect your response to this not to include an actual examples of retcons.
Examples of what? Of things that aren't retconed? Do you even know what you're asking for?
So you refuse to give an answer for what counts as a retcon because you don't have any that your own made-up rules wouldn't disqualify if scrutinized?
>Retcon - Noun: (in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events
So yes, even justifying it by saying 'the remakes aren't a retcon, cause it's a new universe!' because it still changes the context of the old games by introducing multiverse concepts into them. I can transfer a Normal-Type Jigglypuff from FRLG upward into Bank, and it becomes a Fairy-Type, despite it not being one before. Or is your justification, "that's a different world, so it experiences it differently!"?
Pokemon was always a multiverse franchise, though. The only way you can legitimately fulfill Oak's lifelong dream of having a fully catalogued Pokedex without relying on unintentional glitches is to trade with an alternate version of yourself for Pokemon you're unable to find or obtain.
That's not true, and you know it. In the original games, you are meant to trade with 'others' not yourself from other dimensions. 'Red' within the game serves as an avatar for the player's experience in-game, and limitations in game-play are not the same as defined lore. It wasn't until Gen 4 that Pokemon even began to breach on concepts beyond Space and Time, introducing loose plot points about malleable reality, before later games refined the concept further. And sure, Pokemon has played with the concept since that point, but that's what makes it a retcon.
The anon you're replying to is obviously a moron trying to push his headcanon, but if a single universe wasn't established then there being multiple(at any point later) is not a retcon.
How is introducing a Multiverse not a Retcon, if it changes the lore of the original games? It is additional, new, information that changes the perception of the previous incarnation of events.
Like, the belief of the implication in ORAS that the Universe that the asteroid was being flung to was the Universe from RSE. Whether its true or just fanon, that changes the reality of experience for the old games. It's not going to ever happen in gameplay, but now when you play, you have an understanding that 'in lore, another universe *could* teleport an asteroid on top of us...' because it changed the reality of experience that contained the old game lore due to the implications. I'm not saying it's good or bad, since it's on a case by case basis, but unless it's a sequel that doesn't recontexualize the old, new info is still a lesser retcon.
I clearly asked for 'examples of retcons' but you can't provide any. It doesn't even need to be in Pokemon, just any definitions or examples. But you can't, and won't, because it doesn't support your argument.
>I clearly asked for 'examples of retcons'
Oh, so just make your case for you? Frick off.
By responding, and refusing to add additional information, you are just proving my point that your augment is baseless. But please, continue crying in this thread >"WAH, THAT'S NOT A RETCON!!" because you can't formulate anything substantial to add to the conversation beyond your whining.
You just have no idea what you're arguing about. You're trying to debate pokemon lore, I never even mentioned it. If you weren't so thick headed and stubbornly stupid you'd open your eyes and see what I'm actually saying, but you'd rather shadowbox with ghosts and claim a fake victory over a fake argument some fake person in your head failed to defend.
But, tell you what, I'll allow you to pivot to this completely unrelated thing and change the subject to me talking about pokemon retcons, if you will say "I'm a fricking moron and I don't know what a retcon is, I concede this and I want you to teach me about retcons by giving me examples of it in pokemon."
>How is introducing a Multiverse not a Retcon
By not establishing a single universe at the begining.
>that changes the reality of experience for the old game
Not really?, you were overhyped by poketubers.
>It is additional, new, information that changes the perception of the previous incarnation of events.
This is a moronic, zoomerly definition of retcon that sucks. If this is what a retcon is, then real life has retcons. "Originally my girlfriend was loyal and loved me until they retconned it so she was actually fricking tyrone the whole time". It's babble.
If a character is explicitly said to be an only child early in a series, and then later on has an older brother, that's a retcon. It's not a retcon if they introduce a character's brother and it was never mentioned one way or the other, or if the brother was long-lost.
A retcon is when a fact is changed and there's no in-universe explanation for it. If lies and new information are retcons then the word is meaningless and completely uninteresting.
Real life can't have retcons. Fiction can.
If that happened in a fictional story, that's a retcon.
If it happened in reality, sorry that happened, but I can understand why she'd cheat on you.
Then the idea of a retcon is meaningless and completely uninteresting. If that's the idea of a retcon that you accept then you shouldn't be posting about it. It's not interesting at all to point out that stories introduce new elements and events.
It's not about pointing them out. It's about discussing how these changes thus change the whole product. Sometimes in pointless ways, Sometimes major. If you don't think that's interesting, why are you here?
Oh so polygamy is a retcon now?
Yes anon polygamy is a recon.
>This is a moronic, zoomerly definition of retcon that sucks.
No, it's literally what retcon means. Retcons don't have to change established facts.
When I was growing up, and the average IQ of the internet was much higher, it was taken for granted that a retcon had to change the facts of the universe. There were softer retcons where a bullshit explanation was applied like a coat of paint, or where something was changed but you could stretch your imagination to make it work. It's only in the past ten years that women and moronic children have done what they always do and watered the word down until it means nothing interesting. If a retcon is when we find out a character was lying, or when a character wears a shirt we've never seen before, then we don't need a word for that. That's just what a new installment of a story does.
If you absolutely must you can split it into hard recons and soft recons, but then only hard recons are actually interesting.
Every new piece of information is a retcon by your standards. If a character says a word they never used before that's a recon because we didn't know they knew that word. You have autism.
>If a retcon is when we find out a character was lying,
If at the time, the story/character was written as if they were telling the truth (because they were), then yes, it's a retcon. It wasn't a lie at the time of writing, but now, retroactively, it is.
>Retcons don't have to change established facts.
It doesn't. It just has to change your perception and understanding of events. If new information is added to an existing (FICTIONAL) world that changes the way the audience would understand the narrative then its still a retcon.
> It just has to change your perception and understanding of events
Every mistery novel ends with a retcon.
You're being pedantic. That's a self-contained narrative giving the reader information with the purpose of conveying the story in a particular way for the sake of experience with the story. The way the information is being unfurled is part of the experience with the story, just like the words the author chose have meaning the literal phrasing. Like using repetition to experience for emphasis or using alliteration to ease or increase tension, depending on the sound. It's all a larger piece.
A retcon is additional information, added or changed after the fact, that then changes the circumstance of understood experiences from the previous engagement.
But let me guess, "Pokemon can't have retcons because it's an ongoing story and any new information is meant to simulate how trainers wouldn't have a full understanding of their world!" But if you want to pretend to believe that, bite me.
>You're being pedantic.
No, I literally applied your definition. The fact that its moronic is your problem.
That's every lore thread, yeah.
In another fanbase the thread would discuss actual retcons and whether they were good or bad, but those are just bug words for pokemon fans.
Says the person who refuses to give examples of retcons in Pokemon.
So there's canonically an indefinite amount of Mewtwo roaming around Cerulean Cave, an en masse species of hyper-powerful genetically engineered battle specimens, but you just happened to only find one of them while the rest said "nah, frick you, we're out"?
NTA but pokemon is indeed a video game.
I never said that. I was implying the other 'Red' trainers you trade with aren't literally supposed to be Red, but represent other trainers. Technically, within the actual game of RBY, there is no canon version of Red, because of the type of game Pokemon is with a variety of outcomes controllable by the player. Later games, and supplemental material, just state that Red underwent the same general events the players did (but even they are vague about stuff like Mewtwo, depending on the continuity).
The story events of each game are canon, overall, just not the specifics like your team, amount of defeats, amount of Pokemon caught, etc. If it is something the player has control over, then I don't think you can say for sure what the canon version would be, without something external stipulating what is or isn't canon.
Proving my point further. But please, keep whining.
You don't have a point to prove.
>My point is, those were retcons.
>I gave examples why.
>You said they are not.
>I asked why.
>You said 'because'.
>I said your refusal makes it seem like you don't have an argument.
>In response, you ask me to kiss your ass and maybe you'll answer.
I mean, just keep crying if you want to keep posting and have nothing to add.
Because definitions aren't an argument. There is no special combinations of words I can use to convince you that the sky is blue if you think it isn't, it just us. That's all there is to it. That's not what a retcon is, because it just isn't. Objectively. You're trying to pivot to arguing about the lore, as if that's what we disagree on, because you aren't fricking listening to me. And when that failed, you want to pivot to making me defend a retcon, so you can continue to avoid what I've been saying. You've been trying to argue with a ghost this entire time, and you're frustrated that I'm not biting until you face the very first fricking thing I said.
Cool post, still don't see you giving any examples of what a retcon is? It doesn't even have to be lore, if you are so stuck on those terms.
That's why I said the story-events are canon. There is a trainer going on his adventure, just not a 'player' character. He exists not any choices you make. You don't have to be pedantic about the scope of it, when you know what I meant. That's any game with concrete lore that gives the player option. There is a canon story by the devs for the sake of understanding, but you can bend it in gameplay to your will, but anything concrete that cannot change is more than likely going to be canon to the 'official' plot of the games.
Correct, you still do not see me talking your bait to change the subject. Thats upsetting you, and I don't care.
It's not my fault you're just a bot who only knows how to reorganize text without being able to come up with a free thought to advance the conversation. The topic is 'discuss retcons' but you keep making the thread about me? Why not discuss some retcons and offer up some examples? Or is that too hard for a bot like you to hallucinate?
I have plenty of free thoughts. I have chosen to not share them with you, to avoid giving you a change of subject to grasp on to. You may hear them, after you face and answer to the first fricking thing that I said. Is this the first time in your life someone has held you accountable?
What the frick are you even talking about? I am trying to talk about Pokemon Retcons, the topic of the thread? You really talk like a bot just regurgitating at response text. What does this even have to do with the thread?
My very first post ITT was listing "retcons", and saying that that's not what a retcon is. You've responded by saying I'm wrong, and then instead of defending it, trying to change the subject three separate times, and accusing me of losing for not changing the subject. I will talk about something else after you answer to your first claim, you fricking moron.
Oh, so it's just a semantics argument? That's really pathetic.
If you're really that ass-blasted mad, I'll concede that I'm not going to go through that whole list and defend every retcon. I simply do not care enough. But asking you to explain why you don't think those are retcons, and asking you to explain why, isn't changing the subject - it's adding to the conversation. I wanted to know why you had that opinion and asked you about it, giving my perception and you went hog wild with all this philosophical mumbjo jumbo, which is why I accused you of being a bot. But my guy, your thoughts really aren't that special or cool to hold on to like gold? Why even come here just to dismiss others and then refuse to participate in the conversation?
If you don't think those are retcons, that's a cromulent and you're allowed to think that, but have something to add to the conversation beyond. "No! You're wrong because I'm right! But you're not worthy of my opinions." makes you look sad. But I'm done even responding to you, I'm just gonna go back to having fun and talking about Pokemon.
You're still not understanding this at all, and it annoys me how stupid you are. You don't need to go through the whole list and defend each one, our disagreement is not on the subject matter. If you could fricking read, you'd know I said that about 5 times now. If I had said "That's not what happened, so it doesn't count as a retcon", you mightve had an argument. But I didnt. There is nothing philosophical about anything I've said, I only said that's not what a retcon is, and I never needed to make another point but you refused to address that. I've had nothing on topic to respond to. And the only one refusing to participate in the conversation is you, running like mad from me and insisting on changing the subject.
Yes, but if they aren't alternate versions of yourself from other universes/timelines, you have to justify how they have the Pokemon they have. And because Mewtwo is an option those trainers can have, you subsequently need to justify the existence of multiple Mewtwo in one set world that does not involve spacetime frickery.
Why? It's just an oversight in gameplay. Gameplay limitations don't need to dictate canon. If your Red isn't technically canon to the event, why would the other trainers? No player character in any game is canon.
Without the player character to set the game's story into motion, then technically, everything after the title menu is noncanon, because those are the only parts of the game that don't require a player character.
Therefore, canon has been irrelevant from the very beginning. Pokemon is a game about a title screen featuring sprites of monsters with a noncanon JRPG campaign beyond it.
Magneton, Nosepass and Charjabug being able to evolve with a Thunder Stone was a nice change so they no longer felt obligated to include an area with a "special magnetic field" in every single region. Would've been even cooler if they went the extra mile and said ALL Pokemon that evolve with Thunder Stones can now additionally evolve when leveled up in one of those areas since the implication is that Thunder Stones now overlap with those fields.
This thread is a living proof that TPCi don't have any fricking idea on how to handle their own IPs and assets consistently.
>This thread is a living proof that TPCi don't have any fricking idea on how to handle their own IPs and assets consistently.
Also proof Satoshi Tajiri is dead. How the frick can they sideline the creator of this series like this? They always say he’s living a private life but no one really knows what the frick is going on.
I know this is a thread about retcons, but now I'm interested in getting into the conspiracy theories. When would you say it happened and who went after him and why?
>I know this is a thread about retcons, but now I'm interested in getting into the conspiracy theories. When would you say it happened and who went after him and why?
Either he:
>sold all or most of his gamefreak shares at one point, causing him to not have any power over his studio; hence why this series is being directed by other people
>got institutionalized or went to jail, whether naturally or by “force”
>died of unknown causes, again either natural or odd circumstances
You’re telling me in all of Japan, we don’t know where this man is? No recent pictures since him holding that one Pikachu doll and that one candid photo of him in a suit. We haven’t heard from the man since his opinion on how pokemon’s Special manga supposedly was the way he wanted to depict Pokémon all his life. Why is Ishihara, Masuda, and others allowed to talk about this series but he isn’t? This whole thing is super fricking weird
>how pokemon’s Special manga supposedly was the way he wanted to depict Pokémon all his life
This was a massive red flag
>This was a massive red flag
Frick if I know that was what he said, that’s what the manga added back then and it could’ve just been his way for it getting traction
All retcons are bad. Stick to one thing or don't make it to begin with.
Retcons are by definition neither good nor bad. There are good retcons and bad ones.
Room temperature take
Sometimes ideas just don't work out in practice. Like Captain America's cringeworthy and out of character "Commie Smasher" era that was retconned into his iconic backstory of being frozen and the "Commie Smasher" being an insane imposter.
Most retcons are for the better as they're removing stuff that was either always stupid (Ash Greninja) or superseded by superior canon. I much prefer Pokemon's world being distinct from our own (different countries/geography and "regular" animals not being a thing). Makes it feel more interesting.
Yes, Jimmies. Those are all retcons. That's why we are here. Gen 2 is the start of all retcons because why would Mew gave birth to Mewtwo if legendaries can't breed and Pokemon can only lay eggs?
>Worst
Real world entities (animals, places, references) etc, infinite use TMs splitting in gen8 with TRs only to then get rid of them outright in gen9 while also diminishing the movepools of shitmons specifically, & the few QoL improvements that flake off with every new gen.
>Best
Bullshit evo methods that just get replaced by Stone evos, one of the only times where the ever so tired multiverse trope(s) actually make sense due to everyone having their own unique adventure, Typing additions like Magneton+all the Fairy changes.
>The only one that actually matters
Picrel as frick, ferment in rancid piss TrashGren
hoenn's entire mythos being retconned into mega wanking still pisses me off. now hoenn will never be able to stand on its own in the future and will always be tied to XY and "the mystery of mega evolution" rather than its original, simple yet effective, earth sea and sky theming. it's obnoxious, it was always obnoxious, and even now that i'm not mad about megas as a concept i'm still mad about what they did to hoenn's place in pokémon lore, because it's so fricking obnoxious.
The key thing I'm getting from this thread is that half you frickers have overlapped your headcanon with actual canon and are taking the games not going along with your fanfiction as "retcons".
The fact that the amount of people who believe the WW2/apocalypse shit is higher than zero is disgusting, this board sucks.
This description is way too generous. A retcon isn't a storytelling technique, it's a failure that arises from a lack of proper planning and at its worst can cause a loss of confidence in anything in the story mattering.
>it's a failure that arises from a lack of proper planning
No, it's adding continuity retroactively. That's what "retcon" is short for; retroactive continuity.
Literally every long-running story has retcons.
There's three types of retcons.
The first is when the writer just messed up earlier on and has to contradict previously established plot points to keep the story going. This isn't a story building technique, it's connecting a firehose to the hydrant before the house has completely burned down.
The second is when the writer accidentally or deliberately contradicts the established story because they either forgot details or just don't give a frick about consistency. This isn't a technique, this is just bad writing.
The third is when the writer changes internal plans for a point that's been mentioned in the story but is still vague enough that it can go in another direction without actually contradicting what was established. This is the rarest type and the only form of retcon that's an actual storytelling technique.
No form of retcon is bad writing. There's retcons that add things to the story without contradicting anything that was previously established, retcons that alter the story, and retcons that subtract things from the stories.
None of these are inherently good or bad, it all lies in the execution.
>No form of retcon is bad writing.
A violation of story consistency is obvously bad writing. It something written before can be changed, what reason is there to think the rest of it or even the story currently being told means anything? The writer might just throw it out too.
Retcons are something a good writer ideally avoids.
Retcons are an unavoidable part of any long-running story. No story has EVERY detail planned out from the beginning.
Mew being the ancestor of ALL Pokemon. We now have Arceus who was born before the universe as well as the creation trio and lake trio who were created shortly afterwards by Arceus. Although seeing as Pokedex entries after gen 4 still says Mew is the ancestor of all Pokemon and possesses the genetic code of all Pokemon it's not been completely retconned, but I doubt GF would ever say Mew came before Arceus.
You're looking at time linearly. Mew birthed the egg containing Arceus and had Celebi take it back in time to before Mew existed, so that Arceus could create the reality that Mew would later inhabit to allow it to birth Arceus.
Then who fricked Mew to produce an Arceus egg? please don’t say Arceus
virgin birth
This is the mother of all mental gymnastics mothers. Holyshit
it's not a funny joke, you know?
Arceus is God and Mew is Adam. The sword trio are the three wise men who witness the birth of Christ
Curse body
"Retroactive continuity" describes details added after the fact just as much as it does rewritten ones.
I like how in the gen 3 remakes they left burn marks where Moltres used to be in Victory Road since it was moved to Mt Ember
>best
Idk if you could call it a retcon but moving away from the original idea of Pokemon existing in the normal world and it's just a new type of beetle fighting was a good move. I doubt it would have been half as popular otherwise. Also dropping the "Pokemon just started existing and we keep finding new ones" thing was a good move too.
I doubt changing Johto to Kansai, Hoenn to Kyuushu, Sinnoh to Hokkaido etc. would impact the popularity of the series one bit. And no one seemed to mind there being real fish, worms, mongooses in the anime
Retcon is usually seen as negative so of course people try to downplay them. For me i dont really think for example fairy type is a retcon. Its just a new change.
>Retcon is usually seen as negative
No part of the term "retcon" implies anything negative. Retcons don't have a negative reputation, bad retcons do.
And "new additions" are by definition retcons if the story and characters behave as if those things were always there. It's like introducing a new character, but the existing characters already know them and act like they've always been there. That's a retcon.
Theres not a single thread about retcons that isnt negative in this website.
Yeah because nobody is going to complain about a good one
Because there isnt one.
Good point
There are plenty of good retcons. This thread is full of them.
Not a single retcon in this thread. Only gameplay changes.
Clefairy and jigglypuff were normal type in gen I to V, fairy type is a retcon.
Removing all the location based evolutions and changing them to stones
>Pokemon
>retcon
lmao come back and make this thread again after GF starts to give a frick about continuity
>protip: probably never
Pokemon is full of retcons.
>Good retcons:
There being more than 151 Pokemon
New Pokemon not being newly discovered
Gym Leaders holding back against challengers because their job is to test them
>Bad retcons
"Alternate universes" being introduced as an in-universe explanation for retcons instead of just letting them be retcons
Hard to say because most actual retcons happen at a gameplay standpoint and moreover the mechanics and plot typically revolves around a non-linear continuity.
A retcon can only really exist if we can confirm that two games exist in the same universe which would mean the only actual retcons that can be 100% confirmed are the differences between the first gen and second gen (ex: Pokemon have a special defense stat, Pokemon can be shiny).
Existing in "different universes" doesn't make it not a retcons, that's just an explanation for the retcons.
For example, all ORAS did was write the pre-Gn 6 games off as an alternate timeline where AZ never created his weapon and thus Mega Evolution never came to exist.
But Gen 6 onwards have all been in the same timeline. The pre-Gen 6 timeline is now basically invalid as there will never be another game taking place in it.
different official universes = different official continuities
different official continuities = no retroactive continuity to modify
This is all of the time I am going to spend on this matter at this point, it's not really a worthwhile conversation as it is because morons will still say things like "gens that I don't like aren't canon" as if it's some grand insult.
Actually instead of shitflinging I will actually address something that does require some form of address or retcon: Pokedex numbers
The so-called first Pokedex that was ever made in canon through the eyes of the player was the PLA dex. It makes no sense, unless explained through a contemporary listing or in HOME universe refactoring, that the National Dex starts with Bulbasaur given what we know about the dex. It should be refactored and start with Rowlet, since the first ever Pokedex in at least the current timeline of SV also starts with Rowlet.
Refactoring would also allow Nidoran to properly be set as species differences in gender as opposed to completely different species. Nidorino/rina can still be set as separate species.
Without the refactor of the National Dex, it implies that species are not discovered but rather categorized by which region actually compiles and submits this grand refactoring process first with their regional dexes (effectively getting all of the "new" Pokemon in a region in the eyes of the player) being the later entries.
The Pokedex was likely a regional thing until Oak. Oak specialized in the Pokedex (every professor has a specialty) so he spent his life building the national dex. Because it was Oak, and he's from Kanto, that's probably why it starts with Kanto Pokemon. He decided to put his home region first before everyone else because he created the Oak standard for the national dex. Like, this is fan canon sure, but all the pieces are there and acknowledged in the series to be fair. It takes less than a few mental steps to reach these conclusions.
>
For example, all ORAS did was write the pre-Gn 6 games off as an alternate timeline where AZ never created his weapon and thus Mega Evolution never came to exist.
Stop spreading misinformation.
>animals were retconned
>But not trees
Tree bros, we won.
>He doesn't know
Trees still exist independently of that Pokémon, which cannot be said of animals.
>Leafeon is a Grass Stone evo!
>Glaceon is an Ice Stone evo!
Frick them for doing this shit. Why the frick couldn't I just evolve an Eevee into Leafeon in Gen1 then, Game Freak? The in world Moss Rock and Ice Rock were a really cool idea and it made those two unique, but they fricked it up because when GF does QoL it only fixes problems that aren't broken.
>Magneton, Probopass, and Vikavolt all evolve with a Thunder Stone!
Same shit as the Eeveelutions. At least the Mystery Dungeon games had the decency to add a "Coronet Stone". Frick GF for taking the absolute laziest fricking option and making them all Thunder Stone evos.
>Azurill Gender Bullshit.
I know this one was a mistake from the start, and it really is kind of a nothing burger issue, but they fricking honored it for like 4 generations before they randomly went backsies on it. I hate that.
>Affection and Friendship are now the same thing!
This is also an Eeveelution related issue. I fricking hate that so many of these come back to that little shit. Fricking affection and Friendship should have never been separate if they were going to be merged like 2 generations later. What was even the point?
Outside of this? Some changed shiny colors annoy the piss out of me. Or that shit where GF decides to swap the shiny and normal color schemes of some Pokemon for seemingly no reason. And all this is obviously not even bringing up some of the more common issues (national dex, all the removed moves, etc).
>Azurill Gender Bullshit
>I know this one was a mistake from the start, and it really is kind of a nothing burger issue, but they fricking honored it for like 4 generations before they randomly went backsies on it
They probably didn't even realize it was there, they "fixed" it by accident by changing how gender is determined. Azurill and Marill STILL to this day have different gender rates which makes zero sense
We need more serious healing Pokemon. Blissey and Audino have big booties and it means their niche is basically just staying in and stalling, but they're clearly meant to be healers. Give us more healing moves. Give us something that isn't Revival Blessing that can just heal dealt damage for fricks sake. And I know there are moves like heal pulse, but I'm looking for something that affects Pokemon in the bag.
This isn't a retcon issue so much as a general continuity issue. There are so many acknowledgements in universe of Pokemon healing other Pokemon and people, why the frick does that not translate to battle stuff? Logistically, if a Pokemon can heal others, it should be able to heal Pokemon not on the field, right?
Every game since Gen 1 has had retcons. Gen 2 starts by pretending we just discovered 80 new Pokemon and 2 new types that someone their neighbors who are in the internet age haven't even heard of.
The Forces of Nature were always shown as a trio and the anime and manga also made sure they were emphasised to be a trio, so wasn’t it weird that Legends Arceus suddenly introduced Enamorus, the fourth member of the “trio” with no foreshadowing or any hints that she existed at all before that game
sometimes I wonder if enamorus was always supposed to exist, but some changes in plans happened, like maybe they couldn't figure a type for it
I say this because the therian forms happened mid gen 5, so it was at least partly always intended for them to have those forms, and since they were based off of a quartet of chinese figures, a fourth one was inevitable