>>51691034Well, yes. They can talk among each other but not with people. It's a common trope in fiction, see for example Dr. Doolittle in which all critters could understand one another but not people. We know it's deliberate because the 2012 product guide talks about it and how few exceptions exist mostly confined to special storylines.
As for most other nonsense people here just don't know much about other works of fiction. For example the original novel of Bambi involved forest critters behaving and exploring very human concepts. Animal Farm involves barnyard critters revolting against their human masters, etc. Someone here said Takeshi Shudo didn't view Pokémon as critters because of that revolt finale he wanted but that's wrong.
This is why I find Takeshi Shudo description of Pokémon interesting. He clearly recognizes that their inspirations can come from all over the place, he says the game creators combined familiar things to create them, he says there's Pokémon that are plant-like, sludge-like, object-like and so on but he is aware that the setting contextualizes them as critters. Most telling, of course, is the 2012 explicitly stating it. Given Shudo and the guide description of Pokémon, combined with Tajiri and Sugimori heavily implying it in Tajiri biography plus the way the guide is set up, it appears Pokémon were meant to be seen as cute, little critters since it's inception. And that's what they are, they're not fantasy races as the other gentleman put it. They're innocent and sweet creatures that are the natural wildlife of the Pokémon universe which are like cats and dogs, real critters that are naturally close to humans.
