What makes people attracted to a certain pokemon? Like when you

>>28441347
>If all pokemon looked like Pikachu with only very slight variations then what would attract you to one over the other?
If this was the case, I wouldn't play the games at all.

>>28441347
It depends on the personality that the starter's design conveys (Examples: Turtwig seems calm and tame, while Chimchar seems rowdy and energetic).

Typing also counts. As well as design/stat preferences. I may like the lightweight/speedy Froakie more than the heavier/bulkier Chespin.

>>28441433
So Pokemon is about choosing your friends / partners based on their appearance... You wouldn't love your favorite pokemon if it looked different.

>>28441477
>It depends on the personality that the starter's design conveys
Good way to look at it.

It's actually very easy.

>is the starter water type?

If no, choose a different starter. If yes, choose that starter.

File: v.png (28KB, 1041x420px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1041x420px

>>28441627
Well what if all the starters looked like this?

>>28441571
Don't put words in my mouth, faggot.
If all of the pokemon looked the same, then there would be nothing to attract me to any particular one. They'd still have unique qualities, sure, but those qualities wouldn't be backed up by their design, so it'd feel empty and pointless.

File: vv.png (10KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 400x400px

>>28441726
and this were the first pokemon on route 1, "ratata"

Thanks anons.

File: it may be time to stop.jpg (133KB, 590x607px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 590x607px

>>28441347
Well, when it comes to starter Pokemon specifically, to begin with I already have a bias when it comes to typing: I want a Pokemon that is reliable in that it should probably be able to take even a big hit; meaning most Fire-types are out by default, since their stat spreads tend to be more on the sweeper side. (God fucking dammit I could complain all day about how weak and useless Chimchar is when used ingame instead of in competitive with minmaxed stats+LifeOrb.) Also Fire is a specialty type that a balanced team will almost never need for coverage. So we're left with Water and Grass type starters, out of which I tend to find Grass far more interesting; Water tends to fall into a rather plain role of balkin' hits and hitting back with Water/coverage moves. A lot of the time Grass provides alternatives like status moves or curiosities like Leech Seed. So on the gameplay side I prefer to pick Grass.

The other side is simply whether I find the starter's design cool, which is why I might occasionally choose other starters like Cyndaquil in gen 2 (since both it and Chiko are really adorable).

That's just how I pick starters; other favourites are either just designs I really enjoy or buddies I've found by playing the games and using a wide variety of monsters. Like, how can you say no to a giant deadly butterfly?

>>28441347
>what makes you pick 1 over the 2 others
Easy, coverage, typing, moves, whatever it takes to destroy the other two starters singlehandedly.
hence why charizard is so shilled

>>28441571
>You wouldn't love your favourite pokemon if it looked different.
yes

>>28441347
For starters? usually the design of the final stage for generations I knew it, or the fire type for the older gens when I didn't know.