The hate that generation five of Pokemon is getting is not justified
Debate Rounds (4)
Round one is for acceptance.
Round two is for constructive.
Round three is for attacks.
Round four is closing/rebuttals.
I look forward to a good debate.
A lot of the hate that gen 5 has gotten is basically the same, so I am going to list and defend the main arguments.
(Note: These are just my opinions being used for the sake of this debate.)
2: The vanillite evolutionary family.
3: The supposed lack of originality.
4: Bad gameplay.
5: Bad starters.
Ok, let's start out with trubbish. Yes, trubbish is a garbage bag. It is not the most creative idea. But before we go all "Oh no, it's a freakin' garbage bag, it's terrible!", let's consider a little big. Yes, trubbish is a garbage bag, but at least it is holding all that garbage in. What am I talking about? Grimer and muk! If you don't know, grimer and muk are two pokemon from the first generation of pokemon that are literally piles of sludge. That's it. So if you are going to go on and hate on the garbage bags of gen five, take into consideration that they were not the first. Also, the first time I went by route nine and saw a garbodor, I literlly thought "Oh man, I need to catch this thing."
Yes, vanillite, vanillish, and vaniluxe are ice cream cones. Yes, the vanillish line is pretty much the same looking. But once again, not the first food pokemon! Exeggcute? All it is is a bunch of eggs! Cherubi? It is a clump of cherries with a face! But do they get as much hate as the ice cream cones? Nope. And honestly, trubbish and vanillite are (estimated) 99% of the reason gen five is hated.
Now, onto lack of originality. Yes, some of the pokemon lacked originality. But, once again, there were always worse pokemon in earlier generations.
Amoongus and foongus--electrode and voltorb have the same thing, but they are pokeballs with eyes! At least the 'oongus' have the plant aspect...
Klink--Uh, magneton? Same exact idea, pretty much.
Chandelue--The whole inanimate-object-pokemon thing? Driftblim, geodude, graveler, golem, bronzong.......
I would type more, but I have run out of characters. I wish the con good luck.
1) Trubbish is, in my opinion, uncomparable to Grimer and Muk. Trubbish is simply an ugly pokemon that proves lack of originality in creating pokemon. It is as if the developers have just looked outside their window and made the challenge "which should we try to make a pokemon of?".
2) Vanillite and its evolutions also show lack of originality. But way more frustrating about these, is that they are simply so everyday that it becomes disturbing. Unlike exeggcute and Cherubi, they are not based off organic material. It is simply something dead brought to life. Also, ice cream cones arent exactly the best looking thing around anyways.
3) The lack of originality is simply because they didn't learn from the mistakes they have made earlier. The formula once again continues, gyms, league and that's it. Such an adventure does not last, because eventually the player gets tired of always having to redo the league and all the saving that comes with it afterwards. A nice innovation would be that the player gets to be league champion and defend his title.
About the brought up pokemon designs: elektrode and voltorb are simple. That is the main advantage to their design. A ball that explodes, is entertaining. An ice cream cone, that looks complex, is not.
Magneton is obviously not the best design either, but so many years later, I enjoy him as one of the non-organic pokemons. The concept is quite well, because it combines steel with electricity through the means of magnets. Magnezone is ugly though.
4) Bad gameplay. I don't know what your arguments would be on this one, but it's not necessarily the bad gameplay, it is rather the fact that much has changed to the visuals, but practically none to the macrostructure of the adventure.
5) Bad starters. Well, the only thing i could comment on here is that they look too complex and are unorigal in their second type. I would rather see new combinations of type, say, water-steel or fire-ground.
1) Trubbish is very comparable to grimer and muk. My opponent called trubbish unoriginal, but this is my point. Which is more creative: a pile of purple sludge with a face, or a garbage bag with a face? Answer: neither! Each one is not worse than the other, yet trubbish gets so much more hate. Why? Because grimer and muk were FIRST. Also, on the developers topic...If you had to think of 719 characters, chances are, there will be some repeats and some flops. Gen 1 was mostly animals and, as time went on, yes, inanimate objects started to become pokemon. Problem? No.
2) I could name tons of pokemon that are either unoriginal or copy another. Vanillite is an ice cream cone; how is that worse that a steel shirt (bronzong) or three nubs sticking out of the ground. (dugtrio) Vanillite is no worse, maybe even better, so why does it get so much hate.
3) Mistakes? People love the pokemon format! It is the only game (to my knowledge) that has this format. There will always be people who say "this is stupid, we want a new format!" But, if Gamefreak changed it, there would be people who would say. "the original was better!" Best to keep it the way it is.
Also, about the whole electrode-vanilluxe thing? Would people rather have a pokemon that is nearly identical looking to a pokeball that explodes and "faints" itself, or a dual ice cream cone? Almost all kids these days would pick the ice cream cone.
4) See above argument.
5) Starters look too complex: A red pig, a green serpent with legs, and an otter. Not that complex. And about the unoriginal aspects of the second stage? No, we have not had a two-legged, serpentine grass starter, a samurai water ninja water starter, or a fir breathing pig for a fire starter. Also, we have 3 of the 4 first games with quadraped plant-backed grass starters. Then we get a serpent and that's unoriginal? A samurai otter with scalchop swords is unoriginal? I think not.
Good luck to the con.
1) Trubbish, Vanillite and whomever else gets critique is simply because designs are either too ridiculous ( a vanilla ice?) or too simple (grimer, as you give as example). For children, overdesigned pokemon are simply not going to cut it: ever since gen III, they look more complicated than before. Too much time is spent to make them look interesting, but pokemons shouldn't be detailed at all: that is where the success of gen I was. A simple pokemon like grimer is easy to recognize and define, and fully identifies it with poison. Vanillite is then simply the most stupendous idea for an ice-type: earlier, they based off animals (seals etc.). I could still name better ideas for ice-types than a Vanilite.
I must agree to what my opponent says: it gets hard to come up with ideas after all this time. You can clearly see that they're having a tough time and therefore get inspired by everyday things. Also, they try to get their older successes back with the mega-evotutions. I'll get back to that later. The point is: when designing pokemon, you can do it with care and you should make them simple. This will aid to their popularity!
2) The format: I agree. The people have loved it for a long time, and I wouldn't like the game anymore if there was no league and no gyms. But it's all about adding new things, making a longer campaign and adding new challenges: like the invention of battle tower!
About electrode-vanilluxe: I'm aware that children most likely wouldn't complain. But the game is mainly played by adults. It is quite simple: electrode is average to children and great for adults, while Vanilluxe is good for children but horrible to adults.
5) They do look more complex than the earlier ones. Charmander for example is easy: a dragon that grows bigger. Their second typing? You are well-aware that we've already had fire-fighting types. Okay, not unoriginal; just worse ideas than before.
Generation five is getting to much hate that is doesn't deserve. Pokemon like trubbish and vanillite are being hated upon simply because they "are ugly" and are "not original". This is not the case. Sure, an ice cream cone and a garbage bad are not the most creative ideas, but neither are many of the pokemon of previous generations, so why does generation five not get the love? Also, according to my opponent, pokemon are getting too complex which is not good for all the children playing the game. But then he/she says that mostly adults play the game, so that argument is irrelevant. Also, complications are sometimes necessary when designing pokemon, otherwise we would just have a bunch of repeats, and then there would be people mad about that. Just leave it as it is!
Also, the game is not entirely the same as other previous games; it had new additions such as the battle subway, black city, white forest, and the dream world. Gamefreak adds new things to gameplay each generation, so why does generation five'
s gameplay supposedly "lacking"? Also, the battle subway is similar to the battle tower.
Thirdly, complexity is not always bad because, like my opponent and I both said earlier, mostly adults play the game. Besides, if we mostly had animal pokemon like gen one, the game would get boring real fast. We need new ideas, and complecations are necessary to add new pokemon to the game.
Generation five gets compared to previous generations a lot. Why are they better? Because they were FIRST. If half the pokemon that were in gen one came out in XY? We'd hate them? (Jynx, Mr mine, grimer, muk, electrode, etc.) Pokemon didn't get worse as time went one, people are sentimental to the earlier ones so the later ones seem bad.
Generation five was my second favorite generation, and is fun with loads of cool pokemon. It is good and doesn't deserve the hate that people give it.
revic forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.