Pokemon - Why Is It So Wrong To Like It?
- Thread starter delanofilms
- Start date
Recommended Videos
i remeber pokemon being the most coolest thing at my school. EVERYBODY had cards, toys and the games. now if you even mention the word, you get shunned. i still play pokemon with some of my freinds who still think its fun. i got every legit pokemon in my Emerald version, im working on it in my Diamond right now.
Still is, and always has been, my favourite game; although it was just the games I never really got into the card game and I grew out of the TV show when I was still a kid.
Oh and since when was it wrong to like Pokemon? All of my friends still play games (and these are college students) and very few people I know complain about it.
And as for those who do complain how are they in a position to comment on what other people's likes and dislikes? If you like some thing then someone elses opinion really should not get to you providing you your self are not forcing other people to accept your views of the topic in question.
Oh and since when was it wrong to like Pokemon? All of my friends still play games (and these are college students) and very few people I know complain about it.
And as for those who do complain how are they in a position to comment on what other people's likes and dislikes? If you like some thing then someone elses opinion really should not get to you providing you your self are not forcing other people to accept your views of the topic in question.
It seems like they are running out of ideas, and I don't really like the combat anymore, but I still like the concept
i like the games and when i was little loved the animé series now i h8 the animé series as its so plastic and obv the same as the rest of the animé series u see owt there but the games are still amazing i've had all the gba and ds ones nether bothered with the other ones for N64 etc
i ust to be really into pokemon when i was in primary school but i still crack on the old pokemon blue now and again but i think the main reason why pokemon is classed as nerdy and childish is because pokemon was a massive fad and when fads become unpopular they are classed as nerdy if u still like it and probs most people think its childish because when they ust to be into it they was a child or younger than they are now. but i dont think it is personally i just lost intreast when i notice that every episode was basicly the same always ending up with team rocking blasting off and i didnt like it when they thought that changing the ryme that they say will mix things up just ended up anouying me.
and i know this going of the point abit but where did the new pokemon come from like i can understand like a couple of pokemon not being descovered till now but there are loads am not sure but there has got to be an extra hundred now and they seem to be everywhere like i saw one of the new episodes and they seem to have replaced all the old pokemon in the woods with the new ones. And the old ones looked so much better
and i know this going of the point abit but where did the new pokemon come from like i can understand like a couple of pokemon not being descovered till now but there are loads am not sure but there has got to be an extra hundred now and they seem to be everywhere like i saw one of the new episodes and they seem to have replaced all the old pokemon in the woods with the new ones. And the old ones looked so much better
fix'd in this post, just click that wonderful spoiler box...delanofilms said:Your 1st pic is messed up.Gerazzi said:Yes but the game is lacking a little bit in logic as is.TikiShades said:If they didn't, wouldn't it be MORE of the same game over and over again? You could argue that Final Fantasy is the same game over and over again, but with new characters.Gerazzi said:
And I was once caught playing Pokemon at school. Turns out half the school plays it. My 3rd period would usually strike up a Pokemon-related conversation during free time.
What do they eat?
Why is every character after the first season of the anime eerily robotic?
Then, the freaking Bug Types.
Can you imagine seeingcrawling out of your bedroom carpet?
Good, now imagine it with realism.
You should come out with something like
ugh.
I'm pretty sure that Pokemon was based off a cicada, actually...
EDIT: But yeah do you see my point?
Aha! And the truth starts to unravel... ;¬)emwhite123 said:squritleChromeAlchemist said:O_Oemwhite123 said:out of the first 3 starting pokemon... i thought Bulbasaur was the worst...ChromeAlchemist said:Wrong? If it's wrong to love pokemon, it's wrong to love Bulbasaur, and death to anyone who says it's wrong to love Bulbasaur! I mean look at him:
charmander and squritle were always better to me...
Blasphemy! Charmander evolved into a flyer, which means he became weak against everything, and IMHO he was the worst. But Bulbasaur has the highest special attack of them all, making him the best pure offensive starter, and in my opinion, the best.
So which one did you like out of the other two then?
Because Blastoise didn't look like THIS.
Anyway, really, I never really saw the appeal, I never really thought it was OMFG THE BEST GAME EVER like all these other kids did, but it was probably because it was one of the first games that so many people had, that you could take it to school, play it in school, half the kids there are playing it too, it gives you automatic friends, etc, you had people to trade with at the time, etc.
I did really enjoy it when I got around to playing Blue, but that was far after the curve happened - it was like right before Gold/Silver came out.
You see, I never had a gameboy, I borrowed it from a friend for a few weeks after he got a new gameboy COLOR, and with it I borrowed his pokemon blue (he had red and yellow too, so he didn't mind.)
I'm not gonna write a review of the game, especially not here, but believe me - it's a very solid RPG, with good concepts of weakness/strengths, an interesting battle system, and it's very pick-up-and-play which is what got everyone I think.
Also it was marketed THE FUCK OUT OF here, with the TV show, the card game, the pocket-pikachu shits, toys, board games, plastic pokeballs, movies, special cards you'd get at the movies, etc etc etc...
So it's impossible to have at least been influenced it.
Anyway, a lot of people feel they're better than you because they "grew out of it." But it really is more sophisticated than most people realize, but it's a lot like Diablo II when it comes to sophistication. The gear is what matters, and the player skill-cap is very low. In competitive play with Pokemon, it's more having a correct set for the match, eV trained correctly, and with correct moves taught to each. I don't know the details, but a friend of mine was pretty good and ended up being a gym leader over at some huge pokemon site, like #3 on their ladder or something. I don't remember which, I can ask him about it. But from what I've seen in other games and from what he told me it seems like more of a "predict-their-prediction" and having a strong set offensively and defensively.
Anyway it's not "wrong" to like it, just people think they're better. I still play Quake, when people think LOL YOU STILL PLAY LOL GO TO NEW GAME FAG. It shouldn't bother you, doesn't bother me.
And believe me, pokemon is still ridiculously popular, even if people are ashamed to admit it.
[img src="http://www.skynet.ie/~cheese/GsocStuff/Blastoise.png" /img]
Anyway, really, I never really saw the appeal, I never really thought it was OMFG THE BEST GAME EVER like all these other kids did, but it was probably because it was one of the first games that so many people had, that you could take it to school, play it in school, half the kids there are playing it too, it gives you automatic friends, etc, you had people to trade with at the time, etc.
I did really enjoy it when I got around to playing Blue, but that was far after the curve happened - it was like right before Gold/Silver came out.
You see, I never had a gameboy, I borrowed it from a friend for a few weeks after he got a new gameboy COLOR, and with it I borrowed his pokemon blue (he had red and yellow too, so he didn't mind.)
I'm not gonna write a review of the game, especially not here, but believe me - it's a very solid RPG, with good concepts of weakness/strengths, an interesting battle system, and it's very pick-up-and-play which is what got everyone I think.
Also it was marketed THE FUCK OUT OF here, with the TV show, the card game, the pocket-pikachu shits, toys, board games, plastic pokeballs, movies, special cards you'd get at the movies, etc etc etc...
So it's impossible to have at least been influenced it.
Anyway, a lot of people feel they're better than you because they "grew out of it." But it really is more sophisticated than most people realize, but it's a lot like Diablo II when it comes to sophistication. The gear is what matters, and the player skill-cap is very low. In competitive play with Pokemon, it's more having a correct set for the match, eV trained correctly, and with correct moves taught to each. I don't know the details, but a friend of mine was pretty good and ended up being a gym leader over at some huge pokemon site, like #3 on their ladder or something. I don't remember which, I can ask him about it. But from what I've seen in other games and from what he told me it seems like more of a "predict-their-prediction" and having a strong set offensively and defensively.
Anyway it's not "wrong" to like it, just people think they're better. I still play Quake, when people think LOL YOU STILL PLAY LOL GO TO NEW GAME FAG. It shouldn't bother you, doesn't bother me.
And believe me, pokemon is still ridiculously popular, even if people are ashamed to admit it.
Ooh, Ooh, teacher, teacher, pick me!
*raises hand in a spastic manner*
I know why it is wrong to like Pokémon.
Now first of, it isn't gay, it is , however, kiddie.
But nothing wrong with that.
So then, what is?
The fact that it's a HUGE RIPP-OFF!
...
Seriously, ever heard of a thing called Megami Tensei, or perhaps Shin Megami Tensei in its later incarnations?
It first appeared in 1987, roughly 9 years before the first Pokémon title.
't Was the mother of all monster capture RPG's. It was dark, evil, mature and thus totally not suited for the little ones.
It not only had the concept of capturing (almost) every creature you encountered.
Even 'evolution' was an axisting aspect.
It also allowed to use several of these creatures at the same time.
You could even combine creatures to create new ones.
Y' can't even do that stuff in Pokémon!
So why does no one know of this?
Because it took till 2005 for the first SMT title to be released outside of Japan...
And then some reviewers had the balls to call it 'influenced by Pokémon'?!
Sheesh...
Reason these games never appeared in the U.S., Australia or Europe,
was the VERY obscure and mature setting of the games.
Nude pixelated women.
Demons based on real religions (there was even an vile demon called 'JAHWE', ouch!)
And so forth, and so on.
Then came Nintendo, ditched the 'fusion'- and 'multiple demons at once in a battle'-options
and slapped some childish plot 'n creatures on it.
A shame...
*raises hand in a spastic manner*
I know why it is wrong to like Pokémon.
Now first of, it isn't gay, it is , however, kiddie.
But nothing wrong with that.
So then, what is?
The fact that it's a HUGE RIPP-OFF!
...
Seriously, ever heard of a thing called Megami Tensei, or perhaps Shin Megami Tensei in its later incarnations?
It first appeared in 1987, roughly 9 years before the first Pokémon title.
't Was the mother of all monster capture RPG's. It was dark, evil, mature and thus totally not suited for the little ones.
It not only had the concept of capturing (almost) every creature you encountered.
Even 'evolution' was an axisting aspect.
It also allowed to use several of these creatures at the same time.
You could even combine creatures to create new ones.
Y' can't even do that stuff in Pokémon!
So why does no one know of this?
Because it took till 2005 for the first SMT title to be released outside of Japan...
And then some reviewers had the balls to call it 'influenced by Pokémon'?!
Sheesh...
Reason these games never appeared in the U.S., Australia or Europe,
was the VERY obscure and mature setting of the games.
Nude pixelated women.
Demons based on real religions (there was even an vile demon called 'JAHWE', ouch!)
And so forth, and so on.
Then came Nintendo, ditched the 'fusion'- and 'multiple demons at once in a battle'-options
and slapped some childish plot 'n creatures on it.
A shame...
[sarcasm]As this guy said, aside from the plot, setting, and most gameplay options, Pokemon is just like the Shin Megami Tensei series. They're both based on the idea of collecting and trading creatures who fight instead of people.Arqus_Zed said:
And since Megami Tensei was not a genre maker, nor an influential RPG, Pokemon is an absolute rip-off. Pokemon has taken Megami's place and prevented its descendants from getting their well-deserved respect. The little-known Persona series, a spin-off of SMT, consisting of four/six games (with a fifth/seventh rumoured to be in the works) are nothing but a drain on game creation company Atlus, who even had to get another group to support their MMO, SMT: IMAGINE. The remake of the original game with improved localization was made in a broken-down lab by child labour as a result.[/sarcasm]
The titular Digimon are much closer to the demons of SMT than Pokemon are. For starters, they are digital representations of various mythological beings and animals able to change radically and fuse together. However, unlike the demons, Digimon tend to follow patterns in their changes (fusions are not based on families in Digimon).
Now, I'll be honest here and say I've never played the original games. In fact, the only games in the entire SMT series I've played are IMAGINE and Persona 3: Majora's Mask (username). However, despite the collection aspects of the games, Pokemon is not a rip-off of SMT. The fact of the matter is they share a relatively small niche.
That's not to say that the makers of Pokemon didn't know about Megami Tensei. In fact, I think it's very likely that they had played it, considering Game Freak was originally a video game magazine. So it is likely that Pokemon was, in fact, affected by its predecessor.
I find it especially ironic that you say that the Megami Tensei series was ripped off, when its demons and plots come from numerous source materials. Especially that one book with all the violence. It's called 'being influenced by'. Like how Yahtzee and The Untouchables movie 'influenced' me into buying a fedora. That doesn't make me a rip-off of them. Branston pickle protection money.
MajoraPersona is a batf*** insane psychopath with the strange desire to wear a welding mask. He's also quite rude.
Wow... I knew I would get a Nintendo fan on my back, just not so... soon.MajoraPersona said:
Anyway, 'aside from the plot, setting, and most gameplay options', that's a fail.
They did take most of the gameplay options, but you still have more options within SMT, e.g. the fusion and mutli-character battles. See now? So actually, Pokémon is less a game than SMT.
Oh, and 'Megami Tensei was not a genre maker, nor an influential RPG, Pokemon is an absolute rip-off.' Really nice there mister cynical. My point was that Megami Tensei was an underground series with only a small hardcore fanbase. Of course it pisses me of that Nintendo pulls the whole 'copy/paste-and-make-it-childish'-trick and makes millions, whereas SMT stays unnoticed.
Don't even know why you drag Persona in the whole thing...
By the way, IMAGINE, nothing wrong with that, but you might want to consider picking up a non-MMORPG version of SMT, if you really are interested. Seriously, there's WAY better out there.
I kinda see Digimon as a rip-off of a rip-off...
Besides, not in ALL Megami Tensei-games the demons were 'digital representations'.
Another thing, taking information from mythology and theology is a whole lot different then copy/pasting the gameplay mechanics from a game. You say 'irony', but I. just. don't. see. it.
And I agree, there's a thin line between 'rip-off' and 'influenced by'...
You make a valid point with the gameplay options. Like Megami Tensei, Pokemon allows you to Fight, Use Item, Switch In-Battle Character, or Run. Likewise, the point of both games is to fill up your book based on said creatures while knocking out an evil organisation on the way.
Megami Tensei was one of three major RPG games of its time, the others being Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy. The three of them were highly influential titles. The fact that it was ignored/severly crippled in translation has no effect on its relationship with Pokemon, which came from the same country.
I mentioned Persona because it's one of several spin-off series derived from the popularity of your so-called 'obscure series'. You seem to believe that only a few know about the series at all, when it's likely many people are familiar with it in some part. Despite the differences between the variants, all games specifically derived from the original MT share their core. Ignoring the inheritors of your preferred game's legacy is an odd way to support it.
I'd love to get a SMT game, if you could recommend one to me.
Digimon is... Well, it falls under the 'niche' thing too. It's somewhat in-between the two, since it uses both mythology and animals, whereas SMT tends to stick to legends and Pokemon focuses on animals. Focus being the key word.
It's the philosophy of 'Simspons Did It'. It's an episode of South Park where everything Butters does has already been done by The Simpsons. The lesson of the episode is that just because something has been does by someone else doesn't mean it shouldn't be done again. New ideas are created by those who are inspired by things that already exist. Whether it was made a year or a millenium ago, the things around us give us our thoughts and beliefs. Also, if they find your seamen in your dead teacher's stomach, make sure you explain it properly to your local black culinary expert voiced by Isaac Hayes.
In the end, we're not going to agree. So I'm going to continue finding merit and joy in everything I see, and you'll continue doing whatever it is you do.
Megami Tensei was one of three major RPG games of its time, the others being Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy. The three of them were highly influential titles. The fact that it was ignored/severly crippled in translation has no effect on its relationship with Pokemon, which came from the same country.
I mentioned Persona because it's one of several spin-off series derived from the popularity of your so-called 'obscure series'. You seem to believe that only a few know about the series at all, when it's likely many people are familiar with it in some part. Despite the differences between the variants, all games specifically derived from the original MT share their core. Ignoring the inheritors of your preferred game's legacy is an odd way to support it.
I'd love to get a SMT game, if you could recommend one to me.
Digimon is... Well, it falls under the 'niche' thing too. It's somewhat in-between the two, since it uses both mythology and animals, whereas SMT tends to stick to legends and Pokemon focuses on animals. Focus being the key word.
It's the philosophy of 'Simspons Did It'. It's an episode of South Park where everything Butters does has already been done by The Simpsons. The lesson of the episode is that just because something has been does by someone else doesn't mean it shouldn't be done again. New ideas are created by those who are inspired by things that already exist. Whether it was made a year or a millenium ago, the things around us give us our thoughts and beliefs. Also, if they find your seamen in your dead teacher's stomach, make sure you explain it properly to your local black culinary expert voiced by Isaac Hayes.
In the end, we're not going to agree. So I'm going to continue finding merit and joy in everything I see, and you'll continue doing whatever it is you do.