Whats wrong with the new generation of pokemon IS the design. Pokemon use to be designed after real animals or living organisms. Now we have pokemon designed after ice cream cones (vanillite), candles (litwick), lamps (lampent), chandeliers (chandelur), coffins(cofigrus),garbage (trubbish and garbador) mushroom pokeballs (foongus), veiny weisels carrying timber (timburr), girder (gurderr) and pillars (conkeldurr), gears and clockworks (klink), snowflakes (cryogonal), knives (pawniard), and things that just look so unimaginative. And they're named so unoriginally as well. Throh and Sawk? Do they possibly throw and sock/punch? Krookodile? Ducklett? Bouffelant? It just makes Gamefreak sound like really bad spellers. They barely change the names. All the generations before were better because the pokemon were designed after real animals. Why would a pokemon look like a man-made invention? Wouldn't the animal be there first? I mean yes, humans designed helicopters after humming birds and etc. but do humming birds have propellars? It's just stupid. And everyone saying the last generation pokemon were bad can stop just saying "yeah, they suck" without giving a reason because the truth is you're wrong. And Gamefreak can't use the excuse saying they ran out of animals to design after. There are billions of species of animals.They designed just over 600 pokemon. Seriously? And most of them are just re-designed. You've got pikachu, ratata, victini, minccino, patrat, emolga, sandshrew (a shrew is a mouse), nidoran and probably a 100 other pokemon that look like rats/mice.
Log in to comment