Google+

Topics

Pokemon

95 comments

  • BladedFalcon - June 28, 2013 7:33 a.m.

    o.O HOLY FUCKBALLS TALONFLAME LOOKS AMAZING AND IT'S TOTALLY GONNA BE MY MAIN POKEMON REGARDLESS OF STATS *coughs* Hey, I love falcons, can you tell? :P Seriously though, Typing alone, Talonflame has the potential to be the coolest early found flying type in the series. My only slight problem is that I don't like to repeat types in my party, and Fennekin is by far the starter I like the most -.- But oh well, sacrifices must be made, i s'posse. Not just that, but so far from what I've seen, this is shaping to be my favorite designs overall since gen I. I mean, Vyvern also looks awesome, and holy crap we have a Panda AND a Lion! two species that when you think about it, it's kinda mind blowing that they hadn't been featured properly until now. So I'm really liking what I'm seeing so far. ...That being said... another friggin' butterfly? Godammit Game Freak, having 2 of those already isn't enough for you??? At least this one seems to have the best design out of the three, but still... Lastly, am I the only one that so far seems to be seeing somewhat of a bias towards fire pokemon? not that I'm complaining mind, Fire types are usually underrepresented in most gens.
  • slimjim441 - June 28, 2013 1:50 p.m.

    As disappointing as it sounds, fire pokemon have always either been a) almost completely shat on in the cases of gens 1 and 2, or b) represented generically as in the cases of gen 4. Nothing competes with gen 1's water types though. They got so much love; it was great.
  • J-Fid - June 28, 2013 2:22 p.m.

    Also, competitively, they are terrible due to Earthquake and Stealth Rock.
  • BladedFalcon - June 28, 2013 2:32 p.m.

    Pfft, Not if you know how to play them. And regarding earth and rock elements, same could be said about those being terrible due to surf, so there. It all depends how you look at it.
  • J-Fid - June 28, 2013 5:27 p.m.

    The current metagame doesn't cater to offensive Water moves the way it does to Rock, Fighting, and Ground attacks. And Fire is also bad against Water, so I don't know where you were trying to go with that one.
  • BladedFalcon - June 28, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    Iunno, design-wise, Fire pokemon in Gen I were miles ahead from all the water pokemon there. But yeah, after gen 2, fire types were criminally underrepresented in gen III trough V.
  • slimjim441 - June 28, 2013 2:55 p.m.

    I'm not just saying design-wise; I'm thinking just overall better. Although I still say pokemon like Blatoise, Cloister, Gyarados, Lapras, Golduck, and Vaporeon look rad as hell. But then, so do Arcanine, Rapidash, Ninetales and Charizard. Magmar and Flareon are okay. But stuff like this is all on a personal scale.
  • Moondoggie1157 - June 28, 2013 12:27 a.m.

    I'm doing my best to stay ignorant to this generation's Pokemon, I really want to be pleasantly surprised when I pick up X version. Every time a new generation is announced I rush to see them all, not this time. Maybe the surprise will give me the same feeling Blue and Silver versions gave me when I started playing them years ago... .
  • ljrivarola - June 27, 2013 10:12 p.m.

    I was already starting to make a list of my possible Pokemon team... But then I remembered that I don't have a 3DS... Crap :(
  • J-Fid - June 27, 2013 5:13 p.m.

    "Wait, a falcon who specializes in fiery falcon kicks." Where have I seen that before...
  • shawksta - June 27, 2013 4:09 p.m.

    I love noirverns Design, and nice that Talonflame is Fire/Flying, though the name just seems off but ill get used to it. The gens off to a great start.
  • Frieza - June 27, 2013 3:50 p.m.

    They look a lot better than Gen V Pokemon so far. But that's not saying much, considering that Gen V was shit. Still, I'm liking what I see. Can't wait to see more!
  • Cyberninja - June 27, 2013 3:57 p.m.

    I don''t want to get into this argument but Gen 5 was fine, especially since its not the gen with 3 different piles of goo, and a bunch of eggs/seeds
  • Frieza - June 27, 2013 4:14 p.m.

    All generations have good and bad designs for Pokemon. But to be fair, the fact that Gen I had some poorly designed Pokemon doesn't make Gen V look any better.
  • Cyberninja - June 27, 2013 9:53 p.m.

    What was so bad about Gen V exactly?
  • Moondoggie1157 - June 28, 2013 12:33 a.m.

    NInja, haters jus' be hatin'. After 500 original Pokemon, people needed something to bitch about, unfortunately Gen V got the brunt of it... I'll admit that I'm slowly drifting away from Pokemon, but I think that will change after X and Y are released. As much as I loved the Black and White sequels, they just didn't quench my desire for new adventures, and because of the lack of shiny, new stuff I think I got bored. Simple things I guess...
  • wadesmit - June 28, 2013 1:08 p.m.

    And on the flipside, with Black and White I saw the rekindling of my Poke-love/obsession, which was cut off after Gen 2. Who know why, growing up, finding new things, that may have had something to do with it - but after buying Gen. 5 games and merchandise, after familiarising myself with the new host of Pocket Monsters, I really took a liking to them, whereas with Gen 3 and 4, it's mostly negative feelings. Odd how a bit of attachment can make more than a bit of difference, though that's merely anecdotal.
  • BladedFalcon - June 28, 2013 2:34 p.m.

    I didn't think Gen V was the best, but I actually like it better than Gen IV and specially Gen III. I know a lot of people have nostalgia for Gen III, but seriously, clean the goggles people, that gen had the most ridiculous, lazy, or just plain lamest designs of any gen so far.
  • badkins1102 - June 30, 2013 6:52 a.m.

    To give you one example, one gen V pokemon was a flying ice-cream cone.

Showing 81-95 of 95 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.