>>41354982Yes, but what makes them capabke is that they're Pokémon. Humans are not.
>>41356191That's right, Pokéanon. That's the entire reason that you don't see humans teaching Pokémon how to read or write our languages. Beasts don't NEED the sort of knowledge actual people possess. I also wouldn't go so far as to call them "friends" or expect them to be grateful, I only expect that they stay silent and do what they're told without question. It's true that an uprising of such a scale could destroy humanity as we know it, but so long as people know how dangerous Pokémon truly are, the beasts will never get such an opening.
If in the end Pokémon did somehow manage to mount a takeover of human society... you'd might as well kill me because you wouldn't have what it takes to get me to obey you.
I kind of wish there were a spinoff game where the main conflict is a tense standoff between humans and Pokémon now.>>41356231It's because Pokémon lack ambition. All they know how to do well is fight and take orders. They have no desire to rise above and beyond what they are on their own merits from what I've seen. The only exceptions so far might be in the Mystery Dungeon games, but even then the Pokémon in those games share a lot of human tendencies with us in various ways, such as the use of buildings and whatnot.
>>41356732This is why I like artificial Pokémon so much. All this theoretical talk of taking away one's rights and free will means nothing if the being created never had any to begin with. We can create them and make them do whatever we want them to without them even being able to comprehend any sort of rebellion. They're the perfect TOOLS for getting the job done, even back before we advanced to where we stand today.
