Poltchageist (the new pokemon)
Comments
-
@RiqMoran you do realize that this Pokémon is based on Sinistea and Polteageist, you know, from Galar.
I recognize that you’re expressing a general dislike of object Pokémon, but I fell that the ship has sailed for this specific case.
0 -
When I look at most pokemon I can believe that they are a part of that world and that they existed independent of humans.
@RiqMoran How do you know that they existed in a world independent of Pokémon? When did they appear in the world? Why weren't humans there? Most of the lore suggests that Pokémon and humans have always existed side-by-side, and in fact used to be even closer.
Just because a Pokémon does not resemble a manmade object does not mean it exists (or could necessarily exist) in a world without humans. They both evolved alongside humans as far as we know. Pidgy lives in the same world as Magnemite.
With that in mind, most pokemon that incorporate elements from manmade objects are bad and ruin the worldbuilding of pokemon.
Why is it bad? Why does it ruin worldbuilding? It's fine if you don't like it. You are as entitled to your own opinion and can have your own preferences. But you need more to substantiate your arguments if you want us to agree with your claim.
Yes, this includes gen 1 pokemon.
But does it? Gen 1 was the first game. Therefore it establishes the rules of the Pokémon world as far as we can perceive them. Pokémon resembling manmade objects cannot be incongruous with the Pokémon world if that is the way the world has always been.
It might not fit in our world. But the Pokémon world is not our world, merely one inspired by it.
Gen 1 is not perfect.
Very true. Did someone suggest otherwise?
There are exceptions.
Why? Why are the exceptions allowed?
Latios, Garchomp, and Dragapult are designs based on airplanes. This is what a proper objectmon looks like.
So living teapots are unacceptable, but living aeroplanes are fine? Why?
Metagross is also an object of some sort, just not one we recognize, and that's exactly why it's good.
I think you are confusing "object" here with something else. Artificial, but not manmade, perhaps? Inorganic? Also, animals and people are still objects.
Once again, it is absolutely fine if you do not like these types of Pokémon. I am not upset or attacking you for it.
But when you say they do not belong in the Pokémon world, that is an objective claim, not an opinion. And I disagree, regardless of whether I myself think the individual designs are good or bad.
They have been in the world as presented by Pokémon games since the very beginning. They are the norm, a world without them would be abnormal. How do you resolve the contradiction?
5
