/vp/ - Pokémon » Thread #12556705

[18 / 1 / ?]

27KiB, 197x159, high_as_shit.png

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:16:34 No.12556705 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12556783

Am I the only one who'd be OK with Game Freak/Nintendo/Monsters Inc. retconning the shit out of Pokemon?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:19:32 No.12556729 Report

Quoted By:

Yes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:21:08 No.12556740 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:22:38 No.12556750 Report

Quoted By:

Maybe

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:22:42 No.12556751 Report

Quoted By: >>12556758

Yes. Also, fuck you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:24:00 No.12556758 Report

Quoted By:

>>12556751
Fuck you, we almost went Malcolm in the middle.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:27:11 No.12556783 Report

Quoted By: >>12556847

>>12556705
For the sole sake of making the Eeveelution methods make sense, I would be perfectly fine with it.

How does it make sense that Leafeon exists this whole time but isn't evolved through a Leaf Stone? What makes it different than Jolteon, Flareon, or Vaporeon?

Same goes for Espeon/Umbreon with a Sun/Moon Stone, and Glaceon for the Ice Stone that would have been added for it (and Snorunt) if GameFreak wanted to be fucking logical about things.

This would also cut out the ridiculous "trade while holding an item" evolutions, or "breed while holding an incense" babies. I don't mind if there are inconsistencies between versions; they already screwed the pooch with Piloswine and Lickitung, so why not just retcon all this bogus now that there are errors anyway?

I doubt extremely that they'll do it, but if this were to come in X and Y, I would be extremely happy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:30:53 No.12556814 Report

Quoted By:

Yes. And it's Creatures, Inc., not "Monsters, Inc."

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:31:24 No.12556820 Report

Quoted By: >>12556896

I would be fine with Nidoran M/F being one pokemon with gender differences, though that would change almost every pokemon's numbering by one.
Also some stupid evolution stuff should be removed like trading and location based evos.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:34:13 No.12556847 Report

Quoted By: >>12557165

>>12556783
I agree with all your points.
It's sure weird all the "but why I couldn't use Leaf Stone on Eeeve in gens 1, 2 and 3?", but is better than how it works now. I prefer Leafeon evolving with Leaf Stone because this way MAKES SENSE.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:39:08 No.12556896 Report

Quoted By: >>12557125

>>12556820
The different base stats and movesets is what make Nidos more than just gender differences. But this probably could be solved with a bit of proper programmation, but as you said, this would screw all the numbers in national dex, so this not worths.
But I really want that they fix that shit with Nidorina and Nidoqueen egg group. It's probably a programming error from gen 2 that they didn't want to correct in gen 3 and kept the error until now. But this is stupid as fuck, why the full grown female cannot breed and the babies can? This is dumb.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:41:45 No.12556912 Report

Quoted By:

Well, since they'd fuck with the whole numbering system they might as well place evolutions next to each other and rearrange shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:49:19 No.12556968 Report

Quoted By: >>12557043

Shelder+Slowpoke=Slowbro.

I need this is my life.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 20:54:42 No.12557043 Report

Quoted By: >>12557125 >>12557201

>>12556968
This could be done using the exact same mechanic than Kyurem form changes. There's a pokémon (Kyurem/Slowpoke) that "absorbs" another pokémon (Zekrom/Reshiram/Shellder) and changes it's appearence, becomes stronger (new base stats) and this change can be reversed (pokédex says that Slowbro can unevolve if the Shellder is gone).
Works for me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 21:01:23 No.12557125 Report

Quoted By: >>12557201

>>12556896
This. Some things just NEED to be retconned.

>>12557043
Throw one in for Mantine, too?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 21:05:22 No.12557165 Report

Quoted By:

>>12556847
Yeah. Even then, there are smaller examples of this such as "Why couldn't my Charmander learn Metal Claw in Gens 1 and 2?" or "Why wasn't my Magnemite immune to poison in Gen 1?" or "Why couldn't Bite hit Ghosts in Gen 1?"

Pokémon go through enough changes over time that retconning evolution methods and such wouldn't be terribly Farfetch'd. And with the supposed new type being introduced, Gen VI would be the perfect time to do so.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 21:09:28 No.12557201 Report

Quoted By:

>>12557043
Yes. That would be absolutely amazing. Would open the gateway for even more pokemon fusions, such as >>12557125

I'm sick of gamefreak comming up with awesome mechanics then not using them for other things both in retcon and later on.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jun 2013 22:34:45 No.12557971 Report

Quoted By:

Yes, maybe they could give flareon some moves.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches