>There's people in /vp/ right now who think having few

>>29250563
Stockholm syndrome kalosperms

I really don't care at this point, i wouldn't mind a short game with few pokemon as long as it's good compared to a game with a giant list of pokemon that feels like a slog.

Quality over Quantity.

70-80 solid Pokemon over filler shit like Spinda, Unown, Babies, etc.

>>29250653
>Quality over Quantity.

This. If only GF didn't drop the ball with pure Normal Gumshoos and Normal/Flying Pikipek evos.

>>29250653
>muh quality over quantity
Except this gen and Gen 6 don't have neither quality nor quantity, just shit overall

>>29250563
i much rather prefer two gens with 80 pokemon each rather than one with 160.

and its fucking hard to come up with new designs, so id rather give them time.

>>29250740
Terrible taste

>>29250740
Ah, but anon what you said there is not an argument, but your own opinion. And in the grand scheme, your value is the equivalent of a piece of paper.

>>29250653
What a retarded argument, the biggest game series in the world can easily do both, this isn't some indie game.

>>29250653
>everything that isn't muh smogon is filler
More like everything that isn't a starter or box legendary

File: 1475431534856.png (274KB, 1280x614px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 1280x614px

>>29250563
>There's people in /vp/ right now who think there's people in /vp/ right now who think having few new pokemon is a good thing

>>29250740
Guess it depends on what you like. I've come to dislike Johto in recent years realizing how it has so many shitmon that suck in-game and competitively. I don't feel that way about Kalos and so far most Alola Pokemon seem to have niches or interesting thought put into their designs/lore.

>>29250806
So is the argument of quality over quantity, since it's all subjective. Your post is also irrelevant.

>>29250819
I always find it both funny and ironic that people that complain the least enjoy the game the most instead of going on in political arguments.

I don't mind there being a small number of new pokemon. I do mind there being a small number of new pokemon, and a lot of those (seemingly) being legends or legendary types, and, especially, having nearly every single one officially unveiled before release.

>>29250869
At least I accept and don't complain. You should learn that to.

>>29250653
but there are people who like Spinda, Unown and the babies. They aren't filler shit for them.

In fact, the more pokemon they add, the better the cances of everyone finding pokemon that they like.

I wouldn't mind the low count if we got more in a sequel or Pokémon Earth. Have it like Gen II where we go to Kalos or something for more Megas and give new Alolan forms for the island part of the game

>>29250869
No, it's not. The difference is that having less Pokemon increases the chances of them being well designed. That's a fact.

>>29250819
But if you take out stuff like babies and cross-gen evos from Johto and Sinnoh, what we have is about the same amount roughly. Do you guys actually give a shit about things like babies or Unown?]

>>29250940
Well you see there are tons of people who like Pokemon and don't jack off to OU....

>>29250936
If gen 6 and gen 7 is anything to go by, no it isn't.

>>29251010
You're still using your opinion instead of an argument.

>>29250869
But that response actually answered OP's question unlike your response which was just shitposting.

>>29250940
Yes, there is 0 wrong with more pokemon of any kind, GF has the power to add 1000 more in one Gen it's their choice to limit themselves to 70, and it can't be attributed to time anymore. They had to do 721 for XY and about 100 in 2 years.

>>29250971
A Pokemon can have a use and not be OU. Avalugg has a niche as a defensive ice-type but sucks at it due to ice's flaws as a type but at least he has a design purpose. What about something like Stantler? Dull moveset, no cool typing, subpar stats not leaning in any real direction, no cool abilities or moves. Other than giving us a deermon, what does he do? And don't claim people care about fucking Stantler now. Even garbage like Burmy/Wormadam is alright because the whole cloak gimmick is kinda neat.

It's not about OU, it's about not having Pokemon that suck and do nothing for the sake of doing nothing.

I don't really care as long as I like the designs and I do, more pokemon would be nice but if there's some arbitrary limit to reach you just end up with filler (6 fucking elemental monkeys)

>>29250563
Because it´s a decision Game Freak took because its more profitable.

That means "good" according to /vp/.

>>29250653
>Quality over Quantity.
>this meme again
They arent inherently opposite qualities. Try to think of your own for once.

> filler shit
said "filler shit" exist for a reason and gen 6 and 7 has plenty of that.

>>29250748
They could get to 156 designs on a gen, so I´m pretty sure they can do more.
I just calculated, and from gen 2 to 5 the average number of mons in a gen varied among the 120s with Gen 6 dropping it to 120, so they could, at the very least, design 120 mons per gen.

>>29250936
>having less Pokemon increases the chances of them being well designed
Anon, designing is a creative effort. The quality wont get up because there are less. There´s no correlation between quality and quantity.

>>29251144
I don't care much about stantler these days, but I loved the shit out of it when I was a kid. Always had one in my team when I played through Crystal.

And I very much doubt I'm a special snowflake for liking it. Just face it, every pokemon is liked by someone and has the right to exist because of that.

>>29250563
There's already too many Pokemon and quality > quantity.
I aint' gonna defend gen 6, that was a fucking rushed mistake but gen 7 so far has been amazing for the most part.

>>29251053
Not the original guy, but Quanitity over quality doesn't really work all the time.
He has a point, If you don't like some of the pokemon it doesn't matter how well you may think they are designed.

Where as having a wide range of pokemon means they have a higher chance of hitting at least something that everyone will like.

You can cook an amazing pile of steaks, but someone may be vegetarian.

>>29251509
>There's already too many Pokemon
>>/9fag/

>quality > quantity
nice meme

>>29251399
I feel you and I can respect your opinion but I just don't think a mon existing for the sake of existing gives it inherent value. I'm just saying personally, I'll take Minior, Komala, etc over the announcement of something like Mantyke or Chimecho. I'm more excited by Pokemon that I like aesthetically actually being interesting to use but if I'm in the minority here, I digress.

>>29251509
Same shit were thrown around before Gen 6 was out, turned out shit.
>quality > quantity
It doesn't work that way there is nothing connecting the two.

>>29250563
good thing? no
Expecting thing? yes
I simply expected it and as such am not hit as hard, as my expectations, and as such hype level were already prepared for it.
I wasn't expecting to like almost the entire list though.

File: 1460146277817.jpg (33KB, 476x624px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 476x624px

>>29250563
Furret is a good thing.

>>29250563
The same but opposite question is just as legit. Why people think more is a good thing?
Especially considering we already have 700 and more creatures to choose from. I could understand if we were still on gen 1 but after 6 gens, there's no need to bloat the list just for the sake of having big numbers.

>>29250653
This is the region with most shitmon yet. Komala, Bruxish, Cutiefly, Drampa, Turdnator, Mimikyu, the two apes, and that Innards Out Pokemon (that I don't even remember the name of because of how shit it is).

>>29251742
>Why people think more is a good thing?
The franchise is about collecting pokémon,despite /vp/ insisting otherwise. Also, more mons mean more good mons since pokémon are usually decent designs at worst.
Not to mention it makes the games better since you´re actually discovering new shit instead of battling the same old mons all over again. It´s one of the reasons BW (and, a bit less so), RSE was good.

>Especially considering we already have 700 and more creatures to choose from.
And most of us already caught them.

>>29251834
>Talking shit about Turtunator and Pyukumuku

Get better taste.

>>29251742
>we already have 700 and more creatures to choose from

boy I sure can't wait to battle all those zubat, tentacool, and bellsprout for the 9999th time!

>>29250936
Actually it just decreases the chance of having horrible lines added in for filler. Yes, that's an increase in the overall quality but that's because you have less bad Pokemon, not more good ones.

>>29250563
Because Dex size doesn't matter when half of the Dex will be shit anyways.

Look at Sinnoh's Dex, it's all just babies, cross-evos and legendaries. There are only like 5 good lines in that Dex.


Quantity isn't mutually exclusive to quality.

>>29252108
>filler
that term again

>>29252194
Not an argument

File: bitch please.gif (366KB, 339x197px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 339x197px

>>29252108
>added in for filler
>anything not-starter, not-regional bird/bug/fossil/pseudo/legends are fillers

>>29251742
I've been using those 700 for 20 years now, do you think I want to train another geodude or another cubone.
>>29252108
It also decreases the chance of having more great lines. Overall quality doesn't increase if both the number of bad lines and the number of overall pokemon drops simultaneously.

File: LWA6s1z.gif (674KB, 500x303px) Image search: [Google]

674KB, 500x303px

>>29252194
>Actually wanting more baby Pokemon, mythical Pokemon, Gimmick mons and shitty cross-gen evos.

>>29251836
It's definitely just as much about using the damned things as collecting them. This whole "caring about battle goes against the spirit" attitude is retarded. Of course people care about battling, it's what you do for like 70% of the games.

Does /vp/ really think Pokemon as a series would have gotten this far without its battle mechanics? Why do you think a lot of other Mon series fail? It's not solely just because of aesthetic appeal, Pokemon is a better polished game than the majority of them.

>>29252309
>i only want starters, regional bird, bug, fossil, pseudo and legendary on my pokedex
>total of 25 is great as long as i dont have """fillers"""

>>29252309
Why would you not want that, it doesn't mean that something has to be taken out.

>>29252238
Says the newfag who doesnt know pokemon are designed to appeal to different audiences and fulfill different purposes.

>>29252309
Never said that.

>>29252338
>It's definitely just as much about using the damned things as collecting them.
Ok, so more pokémon means more to use.

>This whole "caring about battle goes against the spirit" attitude is retarded
I never said or implied that.

>Does /vp/ really think Pokemon as a series would have gotten this far without its battle mechanics?
No, stop projecting.

>Why do you think a lot of other Mon series fail?
Now? Because pokémon is established enough and only Yokai Watch could manage to be distinct enough.
Before? I dunno.
Doesnt have much to do with what I said tho.

> It's not solely just because of aesthetic appeal
Maybe, but pokémon is way better than most of the competition and other games in that regard.

Still doesnt have to do with what I said and doesnt imply that having less pokémon is better.

>>29251358
Less Pokemon to make on = More time given to the ones they do make.

File: 1474958045952.jpg (432KB, 1038x589px) Image search: [Google]

432KB, 1038x589px

>>29252368
>strawmanning
I'd much rather have another Kalos Dex than another Johto or Sinnoh Dex.
>>29252387
Because it's a waste of game freaks time if only a very very small minority is gonna like what they design.

XY has a hell of a lot more polished designs than DPP's. There's nothing in XY's Dex that's as bad as Rhypiorior and Wormadamn.
>>29252476
That's what you were implying.

>>29252387
I just want a "babies aren't filler" defender to explain why we SHOULD want them? Filling arbitrary number counts isn't enough.

>>29252552
Because some people like them.

That's the only reason they need to exist.

t. Elekidfag

>>29252532
Quality is not merely dependant on time and, before Gen 7, the average number of mons per gen was 120, so still short of what it has been proven they can do.

>>29252535
>That's what you were implying.
>implying wanting more pokemon=wanting more gimmick mons,cross gen evos, babies and so on
Your assumption would only make "sense" if gimmickmons, crossgen evos, legendaries and mythicals, etc. were the only kind of pokemon there is.

Is that the case anon? If you say no, this discussion is over.

>>29252532
That's completely false.
Look at shit like Pyroar. Absolutely zero effort was put into that fucker. It's a special attacker with fucking moxie. They completely phoned it in.

>>29252597
this. You dont even need to be an Elekidfag to agree with this.

>>29250563
>"Quality over quantity!"
Yeah. Cancer. Rebbit needs to leave.

>>29252535
>waste of game freaks time
GF has as much time as it needs, there even was no game last year, they have the resources to do whatever they want with their IP.

>>29250653
>Quality over Quantity
Fuck off back to Reppit. That sentiment is only valid if we get a good amount of quality Pokémon, which we don't.

>>29252535
>I'd much rather have another Kalos Dex
Kalos dex fulfills exactly that description
>Starters
>Talonflame line
>Vivillon line
>fossils
>Goodra
>legends
>only a handful of "filler" mons

>>29252535
Mate, Kalos has shit like Pyroar and Aromatisse which are useless in every definition of the world. Then it had utterly generic no effort garbage like Vivillon. As wormadam is unique.

>>29252634
But the the Kalos Dex and Alola Dex numbers without things like babies and cross-gen evos are about the same as Johto and Sinnoh, so complaining about not enough implies you kinda donwant those. The only Gen with a huge native dex without adding those is Unova and we know how mixed /vp/'s opinion is on Unova.

>>29251834
This gen has a lot of shitmons but the apes aren't part of that. Their abilities rape the meta in the ass.

>>29251834
>he thinks Oranguru is a shitmon


He is gonna dominate VGC and there is nothing you can do about it

I would rather have a small amount of really good pokemon and a ballin' plot/gameplay/postgame content/side shit rather than 150 new pokemon and a handful of things that change in plot/gameplay/etc

>>29252695
>Quality

There is the problem right there. Most of them are trash.

File: 1209834756217.jpg (65KB, 600x639px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 600x639px

>>29252660
Fucking kek I didn't even think about that until you mentioned it

Pyroar is such garbage.

>>29252597
Fucking that, there will be people that will like a pokemon and use it, that's what every pokemon is.
You can barely make 2 decent teams with just Alola mons.

>>29250653
>70-80 solid Pokemon over filler shit like Spinda, Unown, Babies, etc.
i agree with this. and i get to focus on having teams without wondering if i missed out on another.

>>29252787
When you have all the money and time you need and can easily design 150 great mons and make a good quality game...

>>29252732
Hell, a good amount of Pokemon this gen look like they're going to be mediocre single stage mons, unless GF decides to actually give them all decent stats to work with for once, which I doubt will happen considering the track record of all the other single stage mons in the series.

>>29252597
>A whole three people like these shitty designs despite the huge majority either hates them or doesn't care for them, we should keep them.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few anon, should people just stop wanting the Battle Front to return because some people didn't like it?
>>29252634
You either have those it you have actually somewhat creative and interesting designs, which is what XY and SM have.
>>29252699
>Much time as they need
No they don't anon.
>>29252745
And the Dex is actually decent because of it
>>29252746
Pyroar is a decent design. Aromatisee and Vivileon are OK.
Wormadam is unique in the fact that it's the most garbage bug type ever made.

The most depressing thing about Kalos is that everyone's teams in hall of fame threads were completely the same. Same shit is gonna happen in SM.
This is so depressing. Everyone using the same Pokemon and a bunch of types getting no representation because of the overall small number of new pokemon

>people are defending gamefreak
>people are defending this empty pokedex
>"""quality""" over quantity

LOL

>>29252772
>But the the Kalos Dex and Alola Dex numbers without things like babies and cross-gen evos are about the same as Johto and Sinnoh,
You mean Jhoto and Sinnoh without those right?
Because the only cross gen evo in the last two gens was Sylveon.

>so complaining about not enough implies you kinda donwant those
But you said what I implied I want more cross gen evos and babies and the like.

>The only Gen with a huge native dex without adding those is Unova
And Hoenn and Kanto. even then, Jhoto has 100 and Sinnoh have 107, a decent amount compared to the 70-80 of the last gens.

> we know how mixed /vp/'s opinion is on Unova
Why should /vp/´s shit taste matter on this?

>>29252883
Again for XY they had to fully program in 720 pokemon for SM and in 2+ years they only made 100. Time was not an issue.

>>29252883
>You either have those it you have actually somewhat creative and interesting designs
>either
You can have both. You really need to start thinking of your own. The quality opposted to quantity is a modern misconception.

>>29252787
Except we've seen in XY that gamefreak will do neither. What they did was a small amount of shitty Pokemon and no content.

>>29252787
Gen 1 had 151 quality Pokemon.

File: Weavayy.png (637KB, 901x891px)

637KB, 901x891px

>>29252897
>people bitching about shit that only just now became a problem because a certain game was bad
>certain game wasn't even bad solely because of that and is only getting shit on as hard because the game as a whole was shitty

I guarantee you that if XY wasn't such a bland piece of shit they would have been a lot more tolerance for its small Dex size. But the game couldn't even do that so people have the excuse to shit on it's Dex size too.

>>29252889
A big issue was that they shoved like 3 different Pokemon into your face anyway so of course people's teams would look the same.

This is more personal preference but I honestly have at least 3 teams worth of Pokemon that I want on my team, and that's not even including the ones from previous generations.

As long as they don't make 1 or 2 Pokemon retardedly overpowered compared to the rest I feel as though team diversity is going to be a lot higher than XY.

>>29253010
You can't.
There hasn't been one generation that has had a large amount of quality Pokemon.
Even my favorite generation 5 had a few stinkers.
>>29253086
No it didn't anon.

>>29253090
A huge part of why XY was bland is because everyone's teams looked exactly the same. Everyone wants to use the new Pokemon, but it's hard to have team variety when there's only 4 of them.

>>29250653
Nigger, there's barely any quality in the new Pokemon, 20 of them are great but the rest are utter shit.

>>29253086
>Quality
>Hypno line
>Electabuzz/Jinx/Magmar
>Mr.Mime
>Kangaskhan pre-Mega
>Doduo line
>Farfetch'd
>Poli line
>etc

Nah.

>>29253168
Even gen 5 had more quality Pokemon than gen 6 or 7 have Pokemon.
Christ, even the almighty nothing but single stage shitmon gen 2 has more quality Pokemon than gen 6 has Pokemon

File: 1475340844984.png (7KB, 240x241px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 240x241px

>>29250563
I'd rather have a few but well thought pokemon than a generation full of filler pokemon whose only reason is to exist is that they were on a "far region"

File: perfect dex.jpg (244KB, 800x564px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 800x564px

>>29252883
>And the Dex is actually decent because of it
is this your wetdream-dex, anon?

>>29253168
>You can't.
Yes, you can, there´s no inherent opposition between the concepts of quality and quantity.

>There hasn't been one generation that has had a large amount of quality Pokemon.
Out of the 721 designs of the first 6 gens, there are like 40 bad ones. I´d say that's a pretty good record, and, aside from that

>Even my favorite generation 5 had a few stinkers.
>few
That implies the amount of not stinkers was large, which is literally what you denied on your previous post. Good work proving yourself wrong.

>>29252883
>The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few anon, should people just stop wanting the Battle Front to return because some people didn't like it?
Fuck off. What you are truly saying is "I personally don't care about this pokemon so it shouldn't exist."

Well, guess what, the world doesn't revolve around you.

>>29253010
How is thinking 70-80 mons that do something interesting or unique not thinking on your own compared to parroting "more is obviously better"? This is the stupidest kind of groupthink. It's fine to disagree but stop putting your view on the intellectual highground.

>>29253272
>shitty dex
>no fossils

>>29253365
but that dex has no fillers at all. you should be fapping to it right now. Quality over quantity amirite?

>>29253296
Doesn't revolve around you either, that argument goes both ways.

>>29253417
The difference is that I'm arguing for there to be more pokemon, so more people has a chance to find pokemon they truly like.

You are saying the complete opposite. That there should be less pokemon as long as they appeal to you, and if somebody disagrees they are just part of the minority.

If you want to truly take the majority needs into account, then you should be asking gamefreak to remove every pokemon except for some gen one pokemon and some of the legendaries from later gens. Because those are the majority's favorite pokemon.

>>29253336
What do you mean 25% is the same old expected shit. It's insane to thing the anchor mon was the most interesting bit in the leaks. Only the gen standards got evolutions and everything else got shafted to make room for another normal/flying bird.

>>29253272
Why does /vp/ strawman this so much? No one is saying random Pokemon that don't fit within an archetype are bad. Why is everything in such absolutes with you faggots?

>>29253206
Nah, it was more because the game was optimised poorly, wasn't written well, and barely had any content worth using.
It's also a slog and has awful plot progression.
>>29253253
I'll agree, but I've like a lot of the Pokemon in 6's and 7's Dex.
Malamar and Vikavolt alone are worth it for me.
>>29253276
>Yes, you can, there´s no inherent opposition between the concepts of quality and quantity.
Well then Game Freak has done a really shit job at it.

>Out of the 721 designs of the first 6 gens, there are like 40 bad ones. I´d say that's a pretty good record, and, aside from that
Yeah, but guess what? They're all distributed pretty evenly across the generations.

>That implies the amount of not stinkers was large, which is literally what you denied on your previous post. Good work proving yourself wrong.
I might be a little bias towards Unova, when it comes to the majority people can say that either half or more than half of the Dex is shitty.
>>29253296
And you're basically saying "I personally do like this Pokemon therefore it should exist."
And your opinion isn't the majority. The majority doesn't like baby pokemon.

>>29253336
>>29253336
>How is thinking 70-80 mons that do something interesting or unique not thinking on your own
Parroting one of the most common misconceptions literally means you don't think on your own.

>compared to parroting "more is obviously better"?
We already explained why.
>This is the stupidest kind of groupthink.
Says the guy who thinks quality is opposed to quantity.
>It's fine to disagree but stop putting your view on the intellectual highground.
Its more saying "your" view is retarded than saying mine is intelectual.

>>29253549
then maybe define what """filler""" means to you because from what it seems, you dont like the dex to be bloated by pokemon that don't follow an archetype.

>no crossgens
>no babies
>no gimmickmons

what else would be left?

More isn't better. I'd rather not have a functional remake of most of the Kanto dex every gen. Gamefreak is clearly thinking (more) about how to define their pokes in viable role. I'll pass on a bloated dex like Unova that was heavy on gimmicks and light on substance and originality.

>>29253561
>And you're basically saying "I personally do like this Pokemon therefore it should exist."

Nope, I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that the only reason a pokemon needs to exist is that someone likes it, independently of wether I personally like them or not.

>And your opinion isn't the majority
Never said it was, that was you.

File: 1387978307670.jpg (5KB, 246x205px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 246x205px

>>29253704
>everything not viable competitively is """filler"""

>>29253561
>Well then Game Freak has done a really shit job at it.
Not really, no. And that implies theres a fuckton of bad designs which you dont say on your next statement.

>Yeah, but guess what? They're all distributed pretty evenly across the generations.
So theres no correlation between quality and quantity?


>And you're basically saying "I personally do like this Pokemon therefore it should exist."
Yes.

>And your opinion isn't the majority. The majority doesn't like baby pokemon.
Some people do

There's only a handful good pokemon from the entire set released.
Most of these are laughably fucking horrible. Why not hire a handful of good fakemon artists and make them shit out like 50 pokemon each, pick the best of that 50, slap them all together, and call it a night? Why put so much effort into squeezing out such a terrible shit?

>>29253704
Everything is viable in the main story, games are so piss easy people beat the XY hall of fame with magikarps.

>>29251358
There is more than a correlation between development time and quality of a product for video games. It's what has given so much merit to the argument that not every single game needs a multiplayer component. Regardless of your opinion on Gen 6 and 7 dex, more development time, be it alotted to brainstorming more unique pokes or refining the games themselves more, gives a higher quality product. But you'll surely follow this up with a shitpost so enjoy the (You) I guess.

File: 1398147473280.jpg (31KB, 250x251px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 250x251px

>>29253704
>an entire pokemon world should only be inhabited by OU-and-above pokemon

>>29253753
It's already been said viable/niche don't purely mean competitively good or anything. Does /vp/ really not get that a Pokemon designed to do something is probably more interesting to most than the next Lumineon? I feel like there's an aesthetic vs gameplay argument here and neither side is quite getting what the other means.

File: whats the truth.gif (1MB, 400x270px)

1MB, 400x270px

>>29253900
>be it alotted to brainstorming more unique pokes or refining the games themselves more, gives a higher quality product
So you want unique pokemon but you don't want gimmickmons

>>29251125
Pray tell anon. Where did you come across your extensive knowledge of Gamefreak's budget, time tables, and dev capabilities? Because just about every game company, from nintendo down, will tell you that all the budget in the world doesn't make up for a tight time table. In fact, this is pretty much common sense from anyone who has been in the employed as anything of merit higher than a fast food worker.

>>29250563
There's a difference between thinking fewer new Pokemon is good and thinking fewer new Pokemon isn't bad.

I don't think it's good that we got 80~ Pokemon but I don't think it's bad, either. As the total number of Pokemon increases there has to be balance. They experimented with ignoring all the old Pokemon and having a surplus of new ones in Gen 5 and the reaction was mixed, and the total number has only grown since then.

People commonly attribute it to some sort of deficiency on GF's part, like a lack of creativity or laziness or whatever but this isn't really accurate. It would be incredibly easy for them to pump out tons of really lazy, really simple designs every Gen if they thought that would make the games better. But they're clearly not in that mindset. It's more about creating a balance of the old and the new, using gimmicks like Megas or Alolan forms to bring older Pokemon back into the fold.

For me personally the number is never what really interested me. I love finding new Pokemon but I never felt a desire to find a certain amount, and I've never been dissatisfied with a single region due to its new Pokemon count.

I guess people just prioritize different things. I like building a team of Pokemon I like, new and old, so I've never really been driven to thinking a Gen that introduces 150 Pokemon is any better or worse than a Gen that introduces 75.

File: 1386113183230s.jpg (9KB, 247x250px)

9KB, 247x250px

>>29253924
>I feel like there's an aesthetic vs gameplay argument here
or you know, world-building vs meta-minded people? the vast seas of the pokemon world can't be populated by just one species of fish

>>29253900
Software quality is not a creative effort anon.
Unless you mean the creative part of it which is not functional to time invested.

>>29253768
>Not really, no. And that implies theres a fuckton of bad designs which you dont say on your next statement.
Arguably there half of all Pokemon are either bad or mediocre.

>So theres no correlation between quality and quantity?
There's no correlation that more Pokemon equals more good Pokemon. Because there's gonna be some shitty Pokemon no matter what.
If anything more Pokemon means more Pokemon that really don't need to be in the game are in the game.

>Some people do
Some, not most.

i dunno those islands seem pretty small

between all the returning old pokemon and the new ones you cant have too many or else that ecosystem would be downright fucked

>>29250653
Quality is a subjetive thing. The more you add the more people you are going to satisfy.

>>29253960
Yes.

Unique Pokemon: Greninja. It's move pool, specific moves, and HA create a role on a team no other Poke can fill.

Gimmickmon: Klinklang. Shift Gear and Gear Grind amirite bruh?

>>29254102
Same difference. Some of us want more Pokemon that fill in ecological gaps, some of us want more Pokemon that do cool things in battle. Of course, it's possible for overlap.

>>29254195
>The more you add the more people you are going to satisfy.

Not necessarily? That's a complete gamble.

>>29254262
How is that a gamble? More is more.

>>29250563
They are gamefreak apologists, that's why.

>>29253610
Obvious no-effort mons. Qwilfish, Basculin, Alomomola, and Finneon are utterly forgettable and mostly exist so that there'd be something "new" for the water. (As opposed to say Luvdisc which has something unique: it's shaped like a heart, and gives you Heart Scales). Kling could evolve directly into Klingklang. Solosis could go directly to Reuniclus. Both of their midevos do absolutely nothing of interest on their themes and only serve to pad out the dex.

>>29254195
But we have close to a
1000 Pokemon counting every single possible species and form, is it really necessary to keep making things simply to make them at that point?

>>29254300
More is more but more doesn't always mean you'll satisfy more people.

>>29253272
>LeakedGen7dex.png

>>29254305
>If you aren't being a complete baby about really pointless shit such as the dex size you're an apologist
Ok.

>>29254146
>Arguably there half of all Pokemon are either bad or mediocre.
But you didnt deny me when I said there`s about 40 like that, and that kinda implies you dont like pokemon that much. Not to mention


>There's no correlation that more Pokemon equals more good Pokemon.
You just said there is. If the proportion is always the same, as you said, and its 50 percent, as you just suddenly brought up, then 80 new mons mean 40 good ones. And 100 new mons means 50 good ones. More is better.

>Because there's gonna be some shitty Pokemon no matter what.
No one denies that.
>If anything more Pokemon means more Pokemon that really don't need to be in the game are in the game.
According to who?

>Some, not most.
And you want to alienate those some because your autism doesnt like high numbers?

>>29254384
The more variety the more people are going to be satisfied. This is fact.

>>29250653
>Quality over Quantity
Only if you like shitty recicled designs.
>filler shit
There is no such thing as filler pokemon faggot.

File: 1422825796498.jpg (17KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 225x225px

>>29254395
>dex size
>pointless
>in a pokemon game

>>29254395
>dex size
>pointless shit
Literally the only reason for a new gen to exist is new pokemon.

>>29250563
>there are unovaqueers on /vp/ who think having a hundred shitty fillermons and maybe one well designed 10/10 like lilligant is a good thing

baka.....

>>29250563

The Gens that introduced the most Pokemon where the shittiest and had the ugliest mons.
Less Quantity but therefor more Quality

>>29254436
It's not. You could have a buffet with thousands of options but if everyone just happens to want the macaroni and cheese they won't give a shit about everything else.

The ODDS of more people being satisfied goes up with variety, at least to a degree, but there are a lot more factors than variety. Quality is subjective but it does matter. There's little difference between 100 dog turds and 1000 dog turds because all your choices are shit anyway.

File: 1476716107279.jpg (114KB, 620x777px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 620x777px

>>29254395
>pointless shit
>quantity in pokemon
>something which gives more variety and interest in the series
Let me guess, you'd prefer a remake of an older game over a new region with more pokemon to discover?

>>29254573
most of /vp/ are 14 year olds who started with gen 5

>>29251010

Except it is. I never really saw anyone except for contrarians on /vp/ hate Gen 6 and Gen 7 designs. When you see people complaining about "ugly new Pokemon" they usually refer to Gen 4 and 5 which were objectively a huge batcj of extremely ugly Pokemon

>>29254463
Unown is filler shit, retard. Really really really bad stats in everything and learns one move that you can't even control what type it is. It exists for a gimmick with the Gameboy Color Printer which is long defunct. No one is going to use Unown on a team versus anything else except for shits and giggles. This isn't me being a metafag, this is acknowledging we really don't need anything like Unown in future gens.

>>29254642
Not him but there's plenty of variety already. The amount they need to add with each game logically should decrease over time as the backlog of Pokemon increases.

Try to look at this from the perspective of someone who isn't a tremendous autist on /vp/ who's already caught every Pokemon up to this point.

>>29254585
>but if everyone just happens to want the macaroni and cheese they won't give a shit about everything else

Sooner or later they will get tired of eating macaroni and cheese all the time, and they will look for other options. The feer options they have after that, the quickier they will get bored of all you can offer them.

>>29254397
>But you didnt deny me when I said there`s about 40 like that, and that kinda implies you dont like pokemon that much. Not to mention
I do like Pokemon, but I'm not gonna say that all are perfect.

>You just said there is. If the proportion is always the same, as you said, and its 50 percent, as you just suddenly brought up, then 80 new mons mean 40 good ones. And 100 new mons means 50 good ones. More is better.
That's not how it works, it's not an exact percent and varies between games.

>According to who?
Just look at Johto's or Sinnoh's dexes.

>And you want to alienate those some because your autism doesnt like high numbers?
>Comping from the person who's this anal about dex size to begin with
I really don't give a shit if the game's have more or less than 100 Pokemon. But I'd rather have a small list of good Pokemon than a big list of shitty Pokemon.
>>29254478
>>29254552
>>29254642
No one fucking cared about the dex size until XY, and it was only that noticeable in that game because the game isn't even fun enough to make you not care about it.
As long as the Pokemon are well designed and the game is somewhat fun it really shouldn't matter that much. It's a really nitpicky thing to complain about, at the very least on par with Pokemon distribution.
HGSS is the closest example I can think of, it has awful Pokemon distribution and an even worse level curve, but that game still gets praised because it's fun and has a lot of other great content in it.

>thinking the game should be designed around the dex instead of the dex being designed around the game

Why are Unovabortions so stupid? They should understand this more than anybody.

>>29254585
>comparing videogames to to literal feces
I don't think you are ready to hold an intelligent conversation.

>>29254552
Yeah it's not like people want to see game engine changes, or have a new location to explore, or have new content to enjoy, or see how type balancing/move reallocation effects the meta, or how some of their favorite old mons might get buffed in some way. That's all gay shit next to having a 7 versions of the pidgey, rattata, pikachu, oddish/bellsprout, machamp, seaking, staryu, dragonite line.

Which this gen had all that.

And you faggots have the nerve to complain about Kantopandering.

>>29254858
Carrying about how Pokemon actually work in battle or the mechanics at all apparently makes you an instant OUfag. Sonehow.

>>29254827
>implying video games = shit isn't an incredibly apt metaphor
>to to

How about you work on your grammar before we start broaching the subject of who's ready to partake in intelligent conversation, alright champ? Thanks a lot, bye-bye now.

File: problematic.jpg (22KB, 318x352px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 318x352px

>you guys are so STUPID
>I would rather have LESS than MORE
>alola looks perfect, im a dumb cuck shit eating virgin and I love my empty pokedex

never change /vp/

>>29254663
>everyone who doesn't agree with me is a contrarian!
>now let me pull false data from my ass to use as an argument
wew

>>29254991
Can you repeat that? But this time with less strawman? Thanks.

>>29254734
>No one fucking cared about the dex size until XY, and it was only that noticeable in that game because the game isn't even fun enough to make you not care about it.

If nobody gave a shit about it before, it was because it had never been an issue until XY.

>HGSS is the closest example I can think of, it has awful Pokemon distribution and an even worse level curve, but that game still gets praised because it's fun and has a lot of other great content in it.

You are only further proving our point here. Yeah, HGSS was good, but the poor pokemon distribution and shit level curve are the most common complaints about the games.

>>29254932
>lol a typo, you are so dumb
Typical /vp/

>>29254991
>MORE IS BETTER BECAUSE I'M A FIVE YEAR OLD WHO'S IMPRESSED BY SHEER QUANTITY

I remember my childhood, too.

File: fatt.jpg (44KB, 497x316px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 497x316px

>>29255047

can gamefreak defense force come up with a better argument than quality over quantity? because rby has 150 quality designs

>>29254991
It's not that people would rather have less, it's that people don't want more if it means a segment of those additions exist purely for padding. And looking at past gens, there's been a lot of shit no one cares about.

>>29255053
>making a typo while telling someone they aren't intelligent enough to partake in a conversation

Do you really not see the irony? That's the kind of post you double-check before hitting submit, what with the tremendous risk of looking like a retard and all that.

>>29255106
Apparently have a fewer number of pokemon to choose from is more fun!

>>29255106
>rby has 150 quality designs

Could your bait be any more obvious?

>>29255106
Can the "Quality is a meme" posters come up with more than subjective, aesthetic appeal for why what we have is even bad?

>>29255051
>If nobody gave a shit about it before, it was because it had never been an issue until XY.
And it wouldn't have been as big of an issue if XY had anything to redeem itself, but it didn't.

>You are only further proving our point here. Yeah, HGSS was good, but the poor pokemon distribution and shit level curve are the most common complaints about the games.
But that's MY point though, yeah those are complaints but a lot of people can get past that because everything else is near perfect.
Dex size shouldn't be the end-all be all for a game's quality. It's only a huge fault for XY because it's just another point against it instead of just something you can accept.

>>29255079
More is better even if the percentage doesn't change you get more good pokemon the more pokemon there are.

>>29254205
>Unique Pokemon: Greninja. It's move pool, specific moves, and HA create a role on a team no other Poke can fill
bruh. Protean is a very gimmicky ability. In fact, A LOT of competitively great pokemon rely on their special snowflake gimmick abilities. If somebody has an ability that auto sets up stealth rocks, gravity or trick room, they'll be sure to be used over other pokemon

>>29255106
It was in the first few replies. Unova is the argument. Though it seems the game is old enough and either you shitlords are too new to remember or it's entered the contrarian hip because it's unloved phase of its life cycle.

>>29255033

Get out of the basement sometime lardass

>>29255140
I don't double check for retards.

>>29255199
What we have isn't bad but that doesn't mean that if GF made more pokemon the quality would drop, the 2 things are unrelated. GF can do both quality and quantity.

>>29255207
More is not better because pure common sense tells us that less time goes into brainstorming, designing, and balancing each individual mon.

>>29255224
You sure showed me :^)

File: 120599421.jpg (25KB, 450x300px)

25KB, 450x300px

>>29255199

Can you tell me why you don't want 100 Pokemon instead of 80? How about 120? You want to encounter lots of older Pokemon in the new region? You want everyone's Hall of Fame team to look identical because there are 4 really good new lines out of the entire lot? You want less choices and variety? You want a lazy game?

I don't get the obsession with the number itself. It really feels like people care about the number more than the actual Pokemon. Did it never occur to you that the game is built around having a certain number of new Pokemon?

>>29255309
Not him, but I don't care either way. Because dex size is not a huge deal breaker for me, same goes for difficulty.

I hated XY because it had bad progression, bad characters, a bad level curve, and mediocre content.

>>29255204
>But that's MY point though, yeah those are complaints but a lot of people can get past that because everything else is near perfect.

Yes, I see that. But what if Sun/Moon pulls out another XY, and ends up givin us a bland game with an empty dex? This point is you're making is not a really strong one, not unless you make it after the games have come out and proved to be actually good.

So far, all we know is that we have a small pokedex with only two three stage evolutionary lines (besides the starters), and a bunch of one stage pokemon, which are often the ones that end up being forgotten the most, which certainly lowers the overall quality of the new regional pokedex.

File: shrek_asari.jpg (28KB, 640x394px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 640x394px

>>29255309
Can you tell me why you want 100 less well-designed mons instead of 80? How about 120? You want to encounter clones and functional replacements for lots of older Pokemon in the new region? You want everyone's Hall of Fame team to look identical because even with a bloated dex there are still only 4 really good new lines out of the entire lot? You want the illusion of choice and variety? You want a bloated game?

>>29254313
>no-effort mons
>Qwilfish
physically oriented Tentacruel. Poison was a physical type at the time.
>Baculin
4 abilities for mind games. Only water type with Reckless for ability.
>Alomomola
cleric. Only water type with Healer as an ability
>Finneon
I'll give you that

Your point against the others aren't too strong cases, however. You just choose to ignore what difference they have over other pokemon. Pray tell, do you have issues against Blastoise, Feraligatr and Samurott--all pure water type starters?

>midevos do absolutely nothing of interest on their themes and only serve to pad out the dex
evolution is a central theme to the game. It also prevents players from grueling grinds because of extremely high levels to evolve or from steam rolling opponents early on.

>>29254710
I'm just some guy who likes to have options in any game/situation, around 80 new pokemon is fine but some just felt incomplete e.g. Pyukumuku, Komala and to a lesser extent, Minior, so it felt like they could have branched it out for the better.

>>29255463

>>29255450
For me, SM has already put in a lot more effort but into it than XY ever was.

If SM ends being as bad as XY, then the small dex would only be another stroke against it. But from what I've seen that hasn't been the case.

>>29255451
Look at your 80 mons m8, starters, bird, rodent, bug, pikaclone , pseudo. This dex has only a few original ideas.

>>29255309
See, the problem is you're thinking I want less. It's not that I want less but I don't think 70-80 is a bad number either since what we have are all new lines and most have some kind of new moves or abilities or even typing to standout.

Johto without Mons related to Gen 1 is an 84 dex with even more single stages than Alola, is that acceptable or not

>>29250563
>There are people in /vp/ right now who aren't grateful for what they get
You aren't owed shit, asshole.

>>29255535
Paired with a 2 region game and being made in the 90s I say it's acceptable.

>>29255199
>Can the "Quality is a meme" posters come up with more than subjective, aesthetic appeal for why what we have is even bad?
because people have different kinds of shit tastes so naturally people prefer a large selection to pick their own shit favorites

>>29255491
>no argument
i knew it

>>29255309
>Can you tell me why you don't want 100 Pokemon instead of 80? How about 120?

Not him but it's not that I don't want more, I'm just content with the current amount. More is always fine but I know it's not happening and I know there are reasons it's not happening other than the kneejerk "THE DEVS ARE SHIT".

>You want to encounter lots of older Pokemon in the new region?

Yeah? What's wrong with this? BW was the exception, not the rule. A good mix of new and old keeps things fresh.

>You want everyone's Hall of Fame team to look identical because there are 4 really good new lines out of the entire lot?

Why would I give a shit what other people use to beat the Hall of Fame or whatever this game's equivalent is?

>You want less choices and variety?

The amount of choices and variety we have already is pretty large, though. Again, more is always nice but I'm satisfied with this amount.

>You want a lazy game?

Why would you undermine your entire post and the entire discussion in general with something like this? Is the difference between a good game and a lazy game in your eyes really just forty Pokemon?

>>29250563
because there are so many damned pokemon already

trickling out a few new ones while adding a lot of evolutions/regional forms/megas is the best way to go

though unless they remove eviolite, more evolutions do not seem likely

>>29255571
Contributing to making pokemon a success 20 years ago, GF doesn't owe shit to the pokemon community of the 90s...

>>29255533
Same with every dex for the past 4 gens.

Also
>birds are all the same
>rodents are all the same
>bugs are all the same

At least be sensible and say pidgey/rattata/weedle/caterpie lines.

>>29255716
There's 720 already would it matter if it went up to 800 or 900.

>>29255773
it will get there, as long as they add 70+ new Pokemon every gen

>>29255716
>trickling out a few new ones while adding a lot of evolutions/regional forms/megas

Number of evolutions SM added: 0
Number of megas SM added: 0
Number of regional forms SM added: 18

Not precisely "a lot"

>>29255591
>2 regions
one is the smallest region in the series and the other is a shitty castrated Version you already played in a better game

>>29255736
Then why the fuck are you satisfied. How can you support that the dex would be less diverse if it had 40 more pokemon.

What will another Normal/Flying bird add to the mix or another normal rodent?

>>29255881
Made 20 years ago.

Sinnoh is 78 Pokemon not counting mon related to previously existing ones. Outside of Gen 3 and Gen 5, what we have is about on par without things related to old Pokemon in most gens. Gen 1 obviously doesn't count for comparison sake since it's the establishing gen.

>>29255881
Remember that gen 2 games were only meant to be an expansion to gen 1 and the end of the series.

You need to keep that in mind when judging them.

>>29255881
And yet it managed to be longer than gen 6

>>29255961
yet the main complaint about shinnoh games seems to be that they have too many cross gen evos....

hmm... if only they had more pokemon...

>>29256027
The main complaint about the Sinnoh games is that they're slow as shit, which Platinum fixes.

Platinum is regarded as one of the best games in the series, right up there with Emerald and HGSS. What's with the revisionist history all of a sudden? Do we no longer like Platinum?

>>29255993
And yet it managed to be even worse than gen 6

>>29255961
sinnoh's 78 pokemon are overall higher in quality than alola's 80 something pokemon, though. that's what makes people look upon it favorably. there's no shit like minior or bruxish in dpp. there isn't a pokemon in dpp that's as ugly as turtonator either. it might be the case that sun and moon have more pokemon than gen iv, but the aesthetics of the mons are on average lower in my personal opinion.

gen v is perfect. a large quantity of extremely quality of designs. i can only hope we get a jackpot of great aesthetic designs for mons in gen viii, because gen vii does not deliver by and large. there are winners, but there are many losers in gen vii.

>>29256083
>Do we no longer like Platinum?
You can like something without thinking it's perfect, you know.

>>29256128
>there's no shit like minior or bruxish in dpp. there isn't a pokemon in dpp that's as ugly as turtonator
(You)

>>29256128
>sinnoh's 78 pokemon are overall higher in quality than alola's 80 something pokemon, though

That's a fantastically subjective statement you have right there. It'd be a real shame if it was totally useless in any serious discussion.

Oh wait, it is.

File: mega_lopunny___mega_altaria_by_tomycase-d7ukus5[1].png (243KB, 1024x573px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1024x573px

remixing/improving older pokemon is better, because there are still loads of shitmons that need help

I'd rather they give Farfetch'd or hell, SPINDA an evolution, mega or regional variant than another girl-shaped plant with a shitty movepool or a single-stage goofy-faced shitmon with a gimmick that doesn't work

trickling out a few new poke's every gen is fine but the dex is always padded with garbage which is time and resources better spent on improving the quality of old shitmons

File: photo.jpg (96KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 900x900px

>>29255964
>implying gen 7 isn't meant to be the end of pokemon

>>29255961
>Sinnoh is 78 Pokemon not counting mon related to previously existing ones.
Cross gen evos are STILL actual new pokemon

>>29256196
how is any discussion on the value of new pokemon not subjective. you're right that what we have is about on par with past generations barring 3 and 5, but beyond that objective fact there's nowhere to go but judge whether these designs are up to par with past designs in terms of aesthetic value. and that's subjective. i don't know what you want from me.

>>29256289
I'm not sure the fanbase is pleasable on that front.

People complained most cross-gen evolutions were ugly and ruined lines. People complained Megas weren't real evolutions and "are Digimon ripoffs". People complain that Alola Forms are pallette swaps and "are Yokai ripoffs/inspired". How do we improve old shitmons without massive overhauls in a way that people who like those Pokemon still approve of?

File: implying storm.gif (3MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 400x225px

>>29256128
>sinnoh's 78 pokemon are overall higher in quality than alola's 80 something pokemon
>there's no shit like minior or bruxish in dpp. there isn't a pokemon in dpp that's as ugly as turtonator either
>gen v is perfect

>>29256305
Yes but it's clear Gamefreak isn't doing anything like that again (probably) so I'm saying let's look at numbers without them.

File: New_pokemon_generation_4_in_nat_dex_order.png (119KB, 1600x495px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1600x495px

>>29256454
which design here is outright irredeemable to you?

I think what gets me is that they hyped up Alolan forms, but there's only 18 of them, only 10 fully evolved ones. That's barely anything. X/Y ended up with more Megas than Alolan forms. Even if some of them were still shit like Banette, at least you could still use it without being as gimped as using an unevolved mon.

>>29256516
purugly, gallade, mime jr, happiniy, kricketot/tune, lickilicky, rhyperior, magmortar, electivire, tangrowth, probopass, chatot, cherubi, cherrim, ambipom

all of those are shit

>>29256635
80% of those are good

>>29256516
None of them are complete irredeemable just like none of the new Pokemon are completely irredeemable.

That being said the Bidoof line, Burmy line, Stunky line, Ambipom, Chingling, Lickilicky, Rhyperior, Magmortar, Gallade, Probopass, Dusknoir, Dialga, Palkia, Heatran, regular Giratina, Darkrai, Shaymin, and Arceus are all designs that need improvement.

>>29250563
Quality > Quantity

>>29253212
this

>>29250563
>there are people in /vp/ right now that thinks that it only counts as a new pokemon if it has its own dex number

>>29257101
oh boy my ninetales can now shoot ice beam instead of flamethrower

such a new pokemon!!!

>>29257184
new =/= unique
With your logic, you could say that the entire gen5 pokedex are just Unovan forms of the gen1 pokemons, and that they only have 10~15 new pokemons.

>>29250563
I think that I prefer find out this way (by leaks), rather than buying the game and see there's nothing new.

>>29257265
Doesn't mean it isn't lazy as fuck

Not to mention ice and dark fags got completely screwed up if they don't want to use alola pokemon

>>29257412
Just because it is lazy, it doesn't mean it isn't a new pokemon. Otherwise shit like Poliwrath wouldn't count.

>fags got screwed up
It's easy to get screwed up if you are restricting yourself. No one ever thought that they would put an equal number of every pokemon type no matter what kind of restriction you put yourself into.

>>29255906
Because I don't have another 40 shit and uninspired mons to worry about causing power creep, ruining a meta, or remembering their relative stat distribution and typing.

>>29254991
Here's how it actually goes:
Large roster with quality Pokemon everywhere>Lots of quality Pokemon, but there is only 70 New Pokemon or so>Lots of Pokemon, but most of which are meh>Alola after the leaks

>>29255166
Which one has the harder choice tho?
a roster with 154 mons, only 5 being good
Or
a roster with only 70 mons, and only 5 are bad

>>29255309
Everyone would want a 160 new Pokemon more than 80 new Pokemon, but the thing is that the 160 new Pokemon are more likely have a bad ratio of Pokemon. Look at Gen 1 or Gen 5. While Gen 5 did have tons of new Pokemon, and some of my favorites, overall, it's a pretty shit Gen.

>>29258166
>Implying that's the case for SM

>>29258277
>While Gen 5 did have tons of new Pokemon, and some of my favorites, overall, it's a pretty shit Gen

Now imagine if gen 5 had 60 less pokemon.

Maybe you wouldn't like any of those.

But since I had more, you were able to find pokemon you liked.

>>29250577
FPBP

I'm happy with the new mons.

>>29258277
Gen 5 has more good Pokemon than gen 6 has Pokemon. Period.

>>29258822
you wish. Gen 5 is filled with trash, my team only had 4 pokemons, even though I used 6 in every other gen. I even did something I never did before, I boxed my starter.

>>29256128
>Gen 5 is perfect

>What's Basculin
>What's Kling Klang
>What's Elesa's Emolga
>What is the literal garbage Pokemon
>What is Patrat
>What is Purloin
>What are the monkeys
>What are the Genies
>What is Samurott
I could go on.

>>29250563
I don't think it's a good thing, but I'm still content with the Pokemon we're getting, so I can't really complain.

>>29258822
The only good mons are the Ghosts, the steel types, and a few traditionmons. The rest are either forgettable PUs or annoying as fuck to fight.

>>29256128
>gen5
>good
Unovabortion detected. It sold like shit, it was the only pokemon game that managed to not be a top seller of its console.

>>29250653
The thing is we got neither

>>29250653
Fuck you spinda is fun and unique and its 3d model is one of better ones

you are getting a hundred though. the alolan versions aren't formes, if you want to train that shit you will need as much efforts as an individual poke would. you are using shitty lore data where actual practical facts shits in your whinny open mouth.