>>27645711 I've never particularly cared about what gets considered a pokemon. But I can at least accept the fact it's pretty god damn retarded. If it was the actual creature it was referring to it would make sense. But the data references what it happens to be inhabiting at the time. In this respect things like Ghastly, Hunter, etc. are okay. But noting a particular species because it's inhabiting a god damn sand castle is pretty stupid. That raises so many questions about the lore and setting. Why do all the sandcastle ghosts have the same sandcastle if they're possessing them? Why the same set of keys? There's no good way for them to explain it and it boils down to "Why do these things all inhabit the same thing? Why do they all look the same? Because fuck you that's why, we can do no wrong."
Even with object pokemon at least with voltorb it makes some damn sense why they look like that and why they're all the same. I still find it lazy and stupid.
