/cog/ - Traditional & Video Gaming

My curiosity is if we'll get new pokemon out of this.

>>187329
I doubt it. When have they ever added new pokémon during a generation? The closest we'll get are event mon reveals, formes and megas.

>>187326
I really want secret bases with online functionality.

That would be neato

>>187330
Deoxys.

I don't think we'll get new Pokemon, but it's not impossible. It's waaay more likely we'll just get a bunch of new mega evos though.

>>187336
What about some more symbiosis evolutions?

>>187336
>Deoxys

That was a hidden event pokémon, not something new added in another game. The gen 6 equivalents are already known.

Randoms keep asking me for trades and showing shiny legends. Alternatively, I try dumping starters on seemingly new players only to find they too have all kinds of hard to get stuff. The latter I kinda get because poke bank but the former makes it feel like I'm late to some weird secret economy.

I find it best to just let the other guy put something up first, quit if I don't have anything worthwhile, and use a level 3 power as a polite parting gesture. I did get a few safaris this way though so I guess it's not a total loss.

>>187345
In White 2 I tried the trade thing and I kept getting people with Pokemon I needed but would sad face everything I offered. Everything, including starters, legends and event Pokemon I didn't think they'd have. I honestly got so frustrated I never traded on that again

And here I was worried that it would be impossible to get a Torchic in X since I only bought it recently and missed the event.

>>187349
Oh Joy Pokemon becoming as troublesome a trading ground as TF2.

>>187353
You really want them to fuck up yet another design?
They'd probably just extend the antenna till they curl, spikes on the legs, more spines at the end of a longer tail, and longer wings with a dumb diamond pattern.

The easy online battle features really made me like 3 on 3 single battles over 6 on 6

>>187370
The eternal stalling does get a bit tiring after a while, yes.
For me I found my preference in 6 on 6 double battles.

>>187408
That why I stated packing more toxic and boosting moves. But yeah, I definitely see where you're coming from

>>187408
Double Rock Slide flinches everywhere.

I'm probably gonna switch to it myself, doubles or no, because Stone Edge keeps missing for me. I don't know what KOs I'll be missing, and I'll probably miss with Rock Slide, but ehh. Sadly, there isn't even an alternative for Focus Blast.

>>187660
Annoyingly, Nintendo tends to not reveal too much about even its major titles until they're about to be released.

>>187669
Because history has shown them their audience gets burnt out on wait hype.

>>187351
It's even worse. Just check the GTS
>LOL NIDORAN FOR LEVEL 100 VICTINI LOL

Trading in pokemon is absolute shit-tier unless you're on a forum or something else with people who actually have an iota of intelligence, negotiation, and understand that Shiny's are super fucking rare.

>>187696
Yeesh.
I'll just skip this one too.

>>187698
Given today fludding do to global warming problem I guess Magma is "dumb".
I still like the "choise your side" plot they brought.
>also Team Aqua are all black pirats now
Um....
This COULD bite them in the butt.
Just saying.

>>187702
Maybe...
Still, making the bad guys skin part of the uniform is a bad idea.

>>187703
I SUPER disagree with that.

Skin color is extremely important as a part of any character design.

Here it would indicate Aqua spends a lot of time at sea in the sun and Magma spends a lot of time underground and without.

>>187696
I was expecting the least from Swampert.

But fuck if Mega Swampert isn't the best one.

I'm okay with all the designs, but I'm baffled as to why Mega Sceptile gets Lightning Rod. It would already be 4x resistant to Electric attacks, and it loses the surprise factor because it needs to be active to Mega Evolve, losing the surprise factor of switching in for a free Sp. Att. boost.

Then there's the fact it seems to be leaning towards Sp. Attacks when the physical Leaf Blade used to be its signature.

Unless ORAS has a Mega Altaria available before the Elite Four, I guess I'm going with Mudkip after all. I think I'll name him "Popeye".

The only thing I can figure with Lightning Rod on Mega Sceptile is that it makes it immune to Thunder Wave.

>>187710
Because GameFreak isn't even trying.

>>187710
>Trees are frequent conductors of lightning to the ground.[10] Since sap is a relatively poor conductor, its electrical resistance causes it to be heated explosively into steam, which blows off the bark outside the lightning's path. In following seasons trees overgrow the damaged area and may cover it completely, leaving only a vertical scar.

Not all stats and abilities are made with the intention of competitive play. Hell, I'd argue outside of Dragons and Legendaries, most of the time a pokemon's viability in competitive is coincidental

>>187713
But Mega-Sceptile IS a dragon.

>>187715 Got me there, but I meant the one or two Pseudo Legendaris in ever game like Tyranitar or Dragonite or Garchomp.

>>187713
Sometimes I wonder, as I just barely miss a OHKO because my poke was running a speed nature over an attack one or come up short on speed because I decided to put the EVs elsewhere.

>>187908
Omg the orbs aren't mega stones at all they're an entirely different entity that works the same way.

>>187908
There are three buttons on the right just above the submit button, they are hard to see but one of them is the spoiler button.

>>187996
you are right it's just a helpful heads up.

>>188006
The board software is funky; when you make a change to board settings, it clears out some options for board (even if they were selected). You have to go back in, re-select options, update again, and then it will take hold. Someone changed /cog/'s settings without re-enabling things like spoiler, which is why >>187908 didn't have the spoiler option available.

>>188052
spoiler the word filter has nothing to do with allow spoiler file summary, which has always been selected and was always available

but the spoiler word filter was enabled at the time that post was made anyway

So Professor Birch is Jontron now.

Being Digimon too wasn't enough. Now they want to be Neopets as well.

>>188840
I am all for Pokemon eating worse similar things and using their strengths.

>>188842

>worse similar things
>Digimon

NOW TIKI there's a bit of contention there!

Mostly in that I'd argue Digimon anime > Pokemon anime overall

>>188844
Well duh but we're not talking about the animes.

Hell, is there any reason to talk about the Pokemon anime other than Jesse and James?

Twitch won Pokemon.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/08/04/praise-helix-twitch-played-and-finally-beat-every-generation-of-pokemon/

>>189149
Probably because few enough people cared at this point that it was a lot easier.

>>189165
>>189149
Absolutely. Even when it was Pokemon Red, when they instated the Democracy/Anarchy system, the game was almost always in Democracy mode which made everything a whole lot less of a hassle. Really, while it is still pretty impressive they got through Red or any of those games, it's not as impressive as many people make it out to be.

>>189166
Yes, at this point the novelty has faded (and with it, the participation.)

What I found more interesting was that they were able to play X by hooking up the controls for an actual 3DS to a computer, since there is no 3DS emulator. Even more interesting is that Nintendo didn't try to shitcan the whole thing, as far as I know.

>>189179
Honestly....while Nintendo could've certainly sent C&D's that would have required the courts to step in to overturn, I wonder if Twitch couldn't have won that court battle. Twitch Plays Pokemon is clearly not the same experience as actually playing a Pokemon game by yourself, and transforms the whole thing into something more akin to performance art. No one would confuse it with the original product, and it's not in the same medium. A fair use defense might very well have worked.

It wouldn't be a slam dunk either way, I think. It would largely depend on the judge who oversaw the case. And regardless of all of that, assuming Nintendo was aware of it, they might have had the same thoughts--and while they may not have been scared to send the C&D anyway, they might have also worked out that the only effect that TPP was likely to have on their sales would be to INCREASE them, as people decided they wanted to experience the "real thing" again after going through the clusterfuck that was TPP. They certainly weren't going to LOSE sales over it.

So lots of new Mega evolutions huh?

>>189351
Not a fan of the concept, not a fan of at least 80% of the designs.
That, I think, more than anything is the main contributor to my failing interest in the series.

That and all the half developed concepts they tried to jam into X and Y. Customization is only interesting if you have a decent amount of options.
Honestly, beyond all the hype, the game feels a bit rushed.

http://www.siliconera.com/2014/08/26/pokkn-tournament-will-focus-action-aspect-fighting-games/

>>190147
And to think they nerfed bullshit weather teams in XY and here we are all over again.

Liking that they're giving Megas to "lesser" Pokemon. Here's hoping Beedrill, Butterfree, Kingler, and Luxray become viable.

>>190240
>And to think they nerfed bullshit weather teams in XY and here we are all over again.

You're not going to see them in VGC and you're not going to seem them in Smogon OU. What's the problem here again?

>>190242
He just wants something to complain about. That's all the gaming community is about anyway.

>>190255
That and harassing people.

>>190255
>>190256
You two are part of the gaming community, ergo for such affirmations to be true, you both have to be at fault of complaining about nothing and harrassing people.

Happy 1 year anniversary XY, I still haven't beaten you.

In other news, RS continues to give more OP users megas. But then they go and give megas to shitty pokemon like Beedrill and Pidgiot which is nice since they've been over shadowed by their replacements.

Interested in the Pokemon TCG? Here are some things to keep in mind when building:



Generally speaking, 1/3 to 1/2 of your deck is going to be trainers. These establish your engine. You will go through these like a fat kid through M&Ms.

About 10-15 of your cards will be energy. If you only run one type of energy, you'll be down near the 10 there, depending on the demands of your Pokemon (if you have expensive attacks and a way to get lots of energy to them, you might go as high as 12). If your Pokemon need two types of energy, it'll be up near the 15. If your Pokemon need three types of energy, god help you.

About 8-16 of your cards should be Pokemon. The vast majority of these should be basics. Some stage 1 evolutions, for instance some versions of Gyarados, are justifiable here, in which case you want as many of the stage 1 as you have of the basic: 1-1, 2-2, 3-3, or 4-4. Make sure it's a damn good stage 1, though.

If you want to run a Stage 2, you have exactly two options on how to run it, and no room to argue against a community that has spent a decade figuring out how to do this right: first, you need 4 Rare Candy. Then, you need to run the set as either 3-1-3, or 4-1-4. Basic and Stage 2 in even numbers, a single copy of the middle.

How do you know if you want 3-1-3 or 4-1-4? Easy. If you only want to evolve it once in a game -- because it's really really hard to get rid of, for instance, or not THAT critical to your strategy -- 3-1-3. If it's absolutely crucial and you can't live without it, or it's not that hard to kill if it gets Catcher'd out, 4-1-4.

So you have your 8-16 mons and your 10-15 energy. The rest of the deck is your 29-42 trainers. Most decks will run a core set of trainers that are the same between all decks because they're just that good.

If possible all your Pokemon should be basic or stage 1, except for a single stage 2 that you have 4 copies of, if that and it better do something amazing.

Best way to run a stage 2 evolution in a deck is 1) pick an evolution with a damn good ability that works on the bench, because you do not want to spend all that time setting up only to get ground down in combat, and 2) run 4 of the basic, 1 of the middle, 4 of the end, and 4 rare candy. The middle stage is a last resort. (as stated earlier)

Your main attacker(s) should almost always be basic or stage 1, never stage 2. Why? Consistency and minimizing needed resources while maximizing efficiency.

Base set Charizard was never good.

>>190842
Datamining what? The game isn't out yet.

>>190842
I think I like the mega designs a bit better this time around.
Some of them still look really stupid, but overall not as ridiculous.
>>190843
The demo I assume.

>>190842
>>190845
I like how the legends and dragons are all still kind of OP while stuff like Beedrill still kind of sucks when stacked up against the other megas.

>>190846
Mega Beedrill's Base Stat Total might be lower, but he's actually got higher attack and speed than Mega Salamence. He's a glass cannon, but his stats make for a good sweeper.

>>190848
Its typing and movepool are pretty bad and it dies to priority. It would have trouble even if it didn't take up your Mega slot.

Yep. Unless Beedrill gets a bitching movepool in the remake (it won't) it will still be pretty bad and I doubt the mega will ever see play on any level other than casual because it's still just not good enough and it doesn't even have the added benefit of a weird ability to build around.

>>190842
I wonder what that bottom thing is.

Also I looked at that expecting to see the megas I've already seen and was surprisingly spoiled. Good show.

>>190874
The best I can figure is Ambipom, based on the color and the multiple hands. But I don't feel like I'm on very solid ground with that guess, because it looks SO different from Ambipom.

>>190876
Looks like something from Shovel Knight.

>playing through X for first time ever
>in fairy town
>beat Pokeball Factory Flares
>go to route 15
>finally have a chance to evolve Pancham
>go to play with Pangoro in Pokemon Amie because yay it's cute

>game stops


>game glitches out and closes, lose all progress of past hour

D-damn... it's like the days of GBA and living on the edge with batteries.

>>190933
Physical.

>>190147
Man, I kind of want to get this but like. I really hated X/Y.

>>191168
Well I hated Diamond and Pearl, but Heart Gold was brilliant I thought.

>>191170
HGSS was good because it was made from GS, which I still consider the best gen. Conversely, RSE is the weakest gen. So RS with some XY paint has nothing of interest to me.

>>191171
>>191170
I love those games, but they suffer in a big way. Namely that they are the easiest pokemon games in the series.
The level curve is laughable and the only fight that ever poses a challenge in the main game is Whitney.

>>191174
Are you joking?
X and Y was by far the easiest Pokemon game I have ever played.
Not once did I need to switch out my main six (the first six I captured),
even without the exp share I found myself constantly over leveled, mega forms made battles a total joke, and pokemon will endure moves simply because you fed and tapped them enough.

If you want a good singleplayer Pokémon game, hacks are pretty much your only choice. The originals are just too easy and repetitive.

My friend was playing Red and trying to catch a Chansey in the Safari Zone. Something happened after he threw a rock (Chansey went to run) and his first party Pokemon fainted (but the animation was Red fainting and the text skipped a line and said "FAINTED"). He was able to send out another Pokemon and throw more Safari balls. Chansey couldn't escape because it was technically in a Pokemon battle but there were only Safari Zone options and Chansey started attacking.

Anyone heard of this glitch? It was beneficial to him since he really wanted a Chansey and was having a hard time catching one but it was weird as hell and I can't find anything about it on Bulbapedia.

>>191221
Your starter really only matters in the first gym or so. Choosing Charmander makes Brock a lot harder, and maybe Misty, but by the time you catch an Abra and evolve it into a Kadabra, Blue and Red stop being challenging.

>>191196
You mean besides Nuzlocking?

>>193335
I don't enjoy grinding and I don't enjoy gambling in games not built around it. Having to choose between hours of repetitive no-effort battles or getting my run ended by a bad die roll is not something I consider fun. Trying to turn Pokémon into a roguelike does not make it any less repetitive.

>>191196
Any recommendations?

>>193337
Still an option.

>>193338
I enjoyed Drayano's hacks of the Gen 5 games. They make most Pokémon available early enough for nice varied team options, give all NPCs better teams and also buff many underwhelming Pokémon. They're worth checking out if you're looking for a good but not unreasonable challenge. I don't have personal experience with his previous-gen hacks, but I've seen those recommended too.

http://www.destructoid.com/pok-mon-shuffle-s-microtransactions-are-even-worse-than-i-thought-287809.phtml

>You'll start with five "Hearts," -- Shuffle's in-game currency -- and win or lose, each stage takes one Heart to play. Hearts take 30 minutes to refill -- I haven't been able to get the StreetPass functionality to refill limited Hearts working yet. Within 15 minutes after the first five tutorial stages, I was waiting 30 minutes to play again. Not good.

>>193343
Or you can get Pokémon Puzzle Challenge for 50kr and injoy a better puzzle game with retro charm.

>>193343
I'm actually enjoying the game a fair bit. I see nothing wrong about the free-to-play methods it uses and it's really not that different from most other free-to-play games. I always find the time-based energy as a great system, allowing me to play a few matches, leave to do whatever else I want or need to do, and then come back to it and repeat.

As far as him not being able to catch some of the early Pokemon, I hate to say it, but that just sounds like he simply didn't do well enough. The catchability success rate is governed by your score and how many moves you have left remaining. You do well, you'll almost always have at least an 80% success rate. At least in the beginning. Yes, the game will get harder and yes, you won't always catch them the first time. But you level up your Pokemon with each battle thus making them stronger and being able to defeat other Pokemon in less turns. So it's like, you know, a Pokemon game.

In short, I can't say I agree with the writer, even just his first impression. It's a fun game. And it's free; the game can be played without spending a dime and all it asks is that you wait some time between sessions. You earn jewels as you play which you could use to get more hearts if you so wish, so there's still an out to the time thing that isn't spending money.

>>193364
>I see nothing wrong about the free-to-play methods it uses and it's really not that different from most other free-to-play games

"Others do it so it's okay."
If anything, Nintendo jumping on that particular bandwagon should worry you. Do you want to see this in the next main Pokémon game?

>I always find the time-based energy as a great system

Yeah, game companies telling you how long you're allowed to play is totally a good thing! Maybe we should do away with yesteryear's idea of being able to buy a game once and then being able to play it when you want for as long as you want and switch back to the arcade model, after all having less control over your entertainment is GREAT!

>it's free

So is Dungeon Keeper Mobile.

The cancer killing videogames spreading to Nintendo is NOT A GOOD THING. I don't want a future where what could have been good games are instead built around making the players weigh their time versus their money. "Pay-to-not-wait" is a terrible business model for anyone who actually likes to play games because those games are designed around getting you to fork over your dosh.

"But only crap games do it" and "but only crap companies do it" are the excuses people brought up before it happened to games they liked. Nintendo taking a hint from EA cannot possibly be interpreted as positive.

Any game that is "free" with the business model being inconveniencing you in hopes of you paying up effectively does not exist to me. I refuse to play games that are broken by design as part of their monetization strategy.

>>193369
It's doubtful Nintendo will make a microtransaction-filled main Pokemon game just because they put them in a free Pokemon puzzle game. And of course I wouldn't want them in a main game. Like come on, no one would. But if it's a game that I don't need to pay anything to play, then stuff like energy and premium currency sounds like a fair trade.

And that was my bad on the wording. To clarify, time-based energy is a fine system for free-to-play games. It's another small compromise of giving you a game for free, one that never seems as bad as some make it out to be. Nobody is saying that we should replace it with actually buying a game because, really, that'd just be a ridiculous thing to say.

As far as Dungeon Keeper Mobile goes, yes, that is an absolutely shitty free-to-play game with terrible microtransactions and time-based caveats. But to compare it to Pokemon Shuffle just because it's free is not a good comparison. Dungeon Keeper Mobile may very well be the worst case scenario of free-to-play, but not every free-to-play game is that bad. Pokemon Shuffle is not that bad.

But if you don't like Pokemon Shuffle, if you don't like free-to-play games, that's fine too. You don't have to. Yes, some DLC/microtransactions can be disgustingly bad and we've reached the point where almost every game will have DLC for better or worse, but we can't immediately assume that every game will be as bad as what EA does. We have to at least give some credit that companies can be and are paying attention to what we, the consumers, are saying. If the crowd is largely against these implementations and they end up not making any money from them, companies will back away from it. Except EA. And maybe Ubisoft. And kind of Activision, except they are making money just from Call of Duty maps and skins and Snoop Dogg voice packs. But I digress.

The "too long; didn't read" version: Pokemon Shuffle is a simple, fun puzzle game. It's free. Would it be better if it wasn't free? Who knows. But just because it is shouldn't be a red flag that Nintendo is going to ruin their other games. It's completely playable and no where near as bad as other free-to-play games.

>>193373
>It's doubtful Nintendo will make a microtransaction-filled main Pokemon game just because they put them in a free Pokemon puzzle game.

If you told everyone a year or two ago that Nintendo will release a F2P game with a pay-to-not-wait mechanic people would also have found that "doubtful".

If you told people in 07 that Nintendo will jump on the DLC money train eventually, people would've laughed at you and called you a Sony/MS fanboy. Now? Get ready for the inevitable limited-edition exclusive amiibo event Pokémon, you know that'll happen.

>Like come on, no one would.

The people trying to maximize profit do, and they're thankful for every player who accepts the idea.

>companies can be and are paying attention to what we, the consumers, are saying

And if the customers are saying that they're fine with this, you'll see more of it. There's a reason they're implementing it in a minor spinoff first. If 1.) they can get enough money out of it and 2.) the customers accept the business model, you will see it in the main games.

>If the crowd is largely against these implementations and they end up not making any money from them, companies will back away from it.

And if that doesn't happen, it's one more company that monetizes its games via anti-features. One would hope that Nintendo won't sink that low, but here they are, testing the waters for it.

>we can't immediately assume that every game will be as bad as what EA does

Pissing in people's faces and telling them to like it is the industry standard.

>not every free-to-play game is that bad

F2P games that aren't ripoffs are the exception, not the rule. Especially when it comes to the pay-to-not-wait model. That was invented as a ripoff scheme to prey on the mentally fragile, the "whales" (actual term used in the industry) who spend 10k on shitty mobile/"social" games that most people had the sense not to put a single cent into.

Injecting that model into games that aren't inherently trash is basically the worst case scenario, because now they're trying to teach new gamers that this crap is just how videogames work.

More regarding pay-to-not-wait and the mentality behind it: http://insertcredit.com/2011/09/22/who-killed-videogames-a-ghost-story/ A bit dramatic, but it gets the point across.

>>193373
Also
>It's another small compromise of giving you a game for free
sounds like you're falling for marketing speech.

F2P games are never "free" and aren't intended to be. The core idea is to get the player to spend more on the game than they would have by just buying a full game because the spending is supposed to continue forever. In practice, this generally means punishing the player for not paying.

Fair F2P games are the exception because they deviate from the core idea to some degree, thus not maximizing the potential profit.

>>200338
Aside from based Rowlet, they're kinda uninspired but none of them are terrible even if they aren't great either.Kinda like Gen Wun in that respect.

>>200338

I like the Koala. They show him doing a spin attack like the Wii Controller dude. I wanna teach him seismic toss since his later evolutions he'll look more like Drop Bear than Koala.

I'm not a fan of how much brown, grey, black and white we've seen so far.

>>200339
They're a bit more Gen 2 than one in that way.

>>200351
I like it, shows they are getting better on track with them being animals.

>>200447
It's based on Hawaii which is known for its tropical environments and not its skyscrapers so they'd better.

//youtube.com/watch?v=NTt65qAkR84

New Pokemon!

Is it me or do most of the names for the newest Pokemon kinda suck? At least the designs are pretty good if not exceptional.

>>200566
There is only so far you can go with making up creatures and names for them.

Eventually you start to suck.

I want to live in a universe where the number of pokemanz is limited (to 500 or even 1000), and the games are centered NOT on collecting new ones, but different kinds of quests and new gameplay ideas.

>>200568
There isn't a thousand Pokemon yet and any single game only focused on a hundred and fifty.

>>200568
>I want to live in a universe where the number of pokemanz is limited (to 500 or even 1000), and the games are centered NOT on collecting new ones, but different kinds of quests and new gameplay ideas.
You should probably play a new pokemon game then, turns out some have come out since Gen 2.

>>200571
Any new game ideas on top of "defeat all the trainers, defeat Team Evil, and collect them all"?

>>200573
>Any new game ideas on top of "defeat all the trainers, defeat Team Evil, and collect them all"?

Yeah. Loads of them. Try Pokemon Ranger or Pokemon Mystery Dungeon, for example.

Assuming you actually *do* want to play a Pokemon game that's "different." It's entirely possible you're just saying you do as a setup for complaining about games you don't play.

>>200576
Dude, I play all the pokes and I'm feeling the grind, myself. Wish there was a proper RPG. Not spinoffs.
Though I did like that Nobunaga's Ambition game.

>>200577
What is a "proper RPG" in this context?

>>200578
Main series gameplay more or less.

>>200579
So you want a game that has different gameplay than the main series, but has more or less the same gameplay?

>>200580
By different game ideas they mean plot. They're just using terms that don't really mean what they want to say.

>>200566
Most of them seem pretty standard for Pokemon. A couple sound like they're meant to be exceptionally exotic.

http://comicbook.com/2016/07/08/trump-tower-is-a-pokemon-go-gym/

oh Pokemon. bet the Gym Leader has a Meowth and Persian just keeps spamming Pay Day.

>>200580
Look man, if you're gonna treat it as a competition and just ask questions to find out how to discredit me, don't even bother asking and just keep believing the series is above criticism.

//youtube.com/watch?v=UkR_LYax6Io
If I had a smart phone that could handle it, I'd totally get Pokemon GO. I wish they add more than just gen 1 pokemon eventually.

>>200620
It's not about it being a competition or about the series being above criticism, it's about me not understanding what you're saying you even want. You said you wanted something different using Pokemon as a basis, I pointed out all the different genres available in spin-off games, then you said you didn't actually want things to be THAT different, just like....the same but tweaked in different ways than the main series tweaks things, I guess?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/15/motorcycle-hits-teenager-as-he-crosses-the-road-playing-pokmon-g/

And that is why you always carry an escape rope.

//youtube.com/watch?v=vKosBJ1Uko0

More new Pokemon!

>>200689
Man, that horse is ugly. Rest I'm completely indifferent to, which is a bad thing.

The horse is my stand out actually.

>>200690
Wonder if its evolution will go in opposition to the usual. Bigger and Meaner looking (aside from a few specific female Pokemon in existence) And that Muddy becomes more sleek and sexy..er cute.

>>200692
The horse is not a furry, Anon. Go outside. It's so big and strong because it's in reference to banei horses.

Also why in fuck are they so recently obsessed with Fire/fighting starters?

>>200776
By recently you realize you mean for over 14 years?

>>200777
Jesus fuck you are right, why the fuck do they keep doing it? It seems so boring.

>>200778
I theorize that the designers like the idea of a fighting style engulfed in flames. That, or fighting gives fire a resistance to one of fires weakness; rock.

Also, newest trailer ==> //youtube.com/watch?v=3AZHowhxM0U

>>200782
I don't like the idea of Z-Moves. Maybe if you have to choose between a Z-Move OR a MegaEvolution it could work out well, but right now this just looks like power creep to me.

>>200778
I don't know. Maybe they're trying to recapture Blaziken's popularity? Though that Pokemon's popularity always seemed kind of overstated anyway. I'm sick to death of the fire/fighting combo.

>>200773
>>200774
>>200775
I like Owl, Seal is OK, Tiger isn't horrible but goddamn I am SO FUCKING SICK of Fire/Fighting final starters. Too bad Delphox was as shit as it was.

Oh man Oricorio is so cute.

>>200810

>SAND CASTLE POKÉMON

THIS IS THE BEST ’MON OF THIS GENERATION, FUCK ANYONE WHO SAYS OTHERWISE

>>200814
Nobody has dethroned Rowlet yet as my fave.

Even better, it's a Bunny Sea Cucumber.

//youtube.com/watch?v=Py2LxgWBaRQ

More footage of variant forms and a few new ones.

>>200832
Holy shit, Game Freak is paying attention to Raichu.

>>200834

And speaking of Raichu: http://awdplace.tumblr.com/post/148794736285/alola-means-family

>>200834
Am I the only one who's always preferred Raichu over Pikachu anyway? Dedenne is my favorite Pikaclone incidentally.

>>200841
Raichu always ended up as my team's resident Electric-type, unless it wasn't available until the very late-game or post-game.

>>200869
Noice, now who's going to voice that fella.

>>200870
Danny Devito.

>>200872
You wish.

//youtube.com/watch?v=SFWLoyZESAc

NOOT NOOT

>>187325
>HOENN CONFIRMED
>"wait when is this thread even fr--"
>2014/05/13
Maaaaan. Doesn't really hit you how dead this place sometimes.

>>200915
Doesn't help that like 90% of discussions happen in /cog/ general, so threads aren't likely to get bumped off any time soon.

>>200915
A lot of other Pokemon discussion has been in the Nintendo generals while people forgot about this thread for a long time.

>>200919
Yeah I checked and notice there was a huge gap in posts between beginning and end of 2015 and middle of 2016.

>>201059

>Integrated Pokemon Snap.

yes please.

>>201063
Still bitter they never once considered a version of that for the Wii U.

Not even shilling
//youtube.com/watch?v=maBHy1USxHo

A punk song about Rowlett.