What's up with Pokemon?
- Thread starter rihopo2
- Start date
Napalmbrain
WiiChat Member
Yay, the anime section is finally seeing some action!
Planetes also made sense. And they managed to make it scientifically accurate, despite it being a sci-fi and an anime.
Not the right type of action tho
NEEDS MORE THREADS ABOUT GOOD ANIME
I was gonna say Noien
But wont
Napalmbrain
WiiChat Member
No one here watches good anime except for you and me.
As someone with a degree in physics, I can assure you Noein is mostly nonsense.
Gikoku Harakami
ミュージック
No one here watches good anime except for you and me.
Boohoo, that hurts.
Napalmbrain
WiiChat Member
Hmm... alright, you liked Azumanga, so you must have taste. And Hime, she has taste as well. Most of the people around here seem to watch nothing but Bleach, Naruto and Death Note.
kingslayer
The Grammar Police
- Mar 3, 2009
- 550
- 0
- Wii Online Code
- 1345-6587-5984-5125
Pokemon makes no sense at all. I mean there's no point in this, but if we're going to take it apart we might as well do it well.
Legendary pokemon work just as efficiently without a trainer. There are also cases where Pokemon become great fighters by themselves due to the dangerous, or harsh, environment.
The pokeball idea is ridiculous, but understandable since it's an anime. They still ride bikes when they have amazingly advanced technology. They could be riding hover bikes or something cool.
When a person is trying to steal a pokemon, they rarely target the trainer. If the thief took out the trainer then they could just grab the pokeballs and leave.
Only Meowth (and Mewto.. maybe more) was able to talk, but somehow every pokemon can understand the human language. How can a wild pokemon understand human language, yet not speak it?
There is almost no possible way to tell between a male and female pokemon.
The criminals in Pokemon have to be complete morons, since it only takes one very strong pokemon to wipe out a town. By taking out all the trainers the vilians would be free to do whatever they want.
Pokemon are able to such destructive things, but whenever a human is hit by an attack they don't even get hurt (flying in the air and being pure black doesn't count).
Pokemon only faint when they should actually die (yes I understand it's a kid show I'm just going throw the problems with it).
A trainer seems absolutely useless to a pokemon. Pokemon have been known to band to together and work perfectly fine, by themselves, as seen by the Squirtle Squad. A pokemon can get it's own food and has more freedom in the wild. By capturing a pokemon, you do nothing for it.
Pokemon have no desire to become stronger (unless like Mewto which proves my point anyway), so by capturing it your just forcing it your own will.
End conclusion: Pokemon is a show about slavery.
Legendary pokemon work just as efficiently without a trainer. There are also cases where Pokemon become great fighters by themselves due to the dangerous, or harsh, environment.
The pokeball idea is ridiculous, but understandable since it's an anime. They still ride bikes when they have amazingly advanced technology. They could be riding hover bikes or something cool.
When a person is trying to steal a pokemon, they rarely target the trainer. If the thief took out the trainer then they could just grab the pokeballs and leave.
Only Meowth (and Mewto.. maybe more) was able to talk, but somehow every pokemon can understand the human language. How can a wild pokemon understand human language, yet not speak it?
There is almost no possible way to tell between a male and female pokemon.
The criminals in Pokemon have to be complete morons, since it only takes one very strong pokemon to wipe out a town. By taking out all the trainers the vilians would be free to do whatever they want.
Pokemon are able to such destructive things, but whenever a human is hit by an attack they don't even get hurt (flying in the air and being pure black doesn't count).
Pokemon only faint when they should actually die (yes I understand it's a kid show I'm just going throw the problems with it).
A trainer seems absolutely useless to a pokemon. Pokemon have been known to band to together and work perfectly fine, by themselves, as seen by the Squirtle Squad. A pokemon can get it's own food and has more freedom in the wild. By capturing a pokemon, you do nothing for it.
Pokemon have no desire to become stronger (unless like Mewto which proves my point anyway), so by capturing it your just forcing it your own will.
End conclusion: Pokemon is a show about slavery.
Splash_King
The Scrubbiest of Hunters
King, read, nao.
I hope you were sarcastic with that post... Even if I havn't watched the anime since the first season, I know that what you're claiming is completely un-pokemon, so to speak. Although I will agree with the anime not making sense, that much is true.
kingslayer said:
OBJECTION!
Nearly, if not all pokemon that aren't classified as genderless (things like a Ditto) all have small, but noticable key differences in their patterns, body size, colors, etc. This ofcourse was only applied once we entered the 4th generation of the pokemon games (the current one), but you get the point.
Aside from that, I'd say everything Bodine said counters your post. [/laziness]
kingslayer
The Grammar Police
- Mar 3, 2009
- 550
- 0
- Wii Online Code
- 1345-6587-5984-5125
My pokemon information is limited to... crystal?
Anyway, Bodine's post only relates to 3 of my points (1, 9, 10). The slavery part was a joke, but the rest isn't.
I never said I didn't like Pokemon, all I'm saying is that if it had to be taken apart than it might as well be done further.
Also, my point on the Squirtle Squad shows that pokemon don't need a trainer, but just need something. Another pokemon can be the "trainer," it isn't necessary for a human to control a pokemon.
Bodine made the point that pokemon "limp" away after they lose a fight. There are pokemon that can heal other pokemon (through spores, sunlight, etc.) and there has been places shown (in episodes) where pokemon go to heal themselves. There are springs and other things that pokemon can use instead of a pokecenter.
Not all wild pokemon enter many battles, most pokemon live peacefully with each other. Any fights that do occur are usually not life threatening or even that dangerous (exception Ursarang and pokemon like that).
So, by capturing and battling with a pokemon, you put that pokemon in more of harms way than it would have faced in the wild. A wild pokemon would not possibly fight as often as a trainer would force it to.
Wild pokemon are freely able to co-exist without a trainer. Increased battle capabilities do nothing for the pokemon. The only way tactical commands help a pokemon is if it has to win fights. A pokemon does not need to face another pokemon unless a trainer forces it to. The only way this would be useful to a pokemon is if it lived in a dangerous area and the trainer released it back into the wild after a period of time. This would give the pokemon and edge over the other creatures to survive.
I'm not trying to ruin Pokemon, CK, I just think that this thread shouldn't have such one-sided debate. I lived Pokemon, in the 90s, and recently bought Emerald and Ruby. I would have bought the newest, but I don't own a DS.
In debate you sometimes have to look past your feelings for the subject so that you can give a better response.
Anyway, Bodine's post only relates to 3 of my points (1, 9, 10). The slavery part was a joke, but the rest isn't.
I never said I didn't like Pokemon, all I'm saying is that if it had to be taken apart than it might as well be done further.
Also, my point on the Squirtle Squad shows that pokemon don't need a trainer, but just need something. Another pokemon can be the "trainer," it isn't necessary for a human to control a pokemon.
Bodine made the point that pokemon "limp" away after they lose a fight. There are pokemon that can heal other pokemon (through spores, sunlight, etc.) and there has been places shown (in episodes) where pokemon go to heal themselves. There are springs and other things that pokemon can use instead of a pokecenter.
Not all wild pokemon enter many battles, most pokemon live peacefully with each other. Any fights that do occur are usually not life threatening or even that dangerous (exception Ursarang and pokemon like that).
So, by capturing and battling with a pokemon, you put that pokemon in more of harms way than it would have faced in the wild. A wild pokemon would not possibly fight as often as a trainer would force it to.
Wild pokemon are freely able to co-exist without a trainer. Increased battle capabilities do nothing for the pokemon. The only way tactical commands help a pokemon is if it has to win fights. A pokemon does not need to face another pokemon unless a trainer forces it to. The only way this would be useful to a pokemon is if it lived in a dangerous area and the trainer released it back into the wild after a period of time. This would give the pokemon and edge over the other creatures to survive.
I'm not trying to ruin Pokemon, CK, I just think that this thread shouldn't have such one-sided debate. I lived Pokemon, in the 90s, and recently bought Emerald and Ruby. I would have bought the newest, but I don't own a DS.
In debate you sometimes have to look past your feelings for the subject so that you can give a better response.
This thread has just been taken over by pokefags
kingslayer
The Grammar Police
- Mar 3, 2009
- 550
- 0
- Wii Online Code
- 1345-6587-5984-5125
Wow... that's a stupid statement. I don't want to start a hate war, so I'll get my thoughts out in this one post. If you reply I'll just let you say whatever you won't, but I won't comment further.
This is a thread about Pokemon, so anyone who has any information about Pokemon would be expected to post. In the 1990's, when I was younger, Pokemon was a big deal. Like everyone else I watched the shows, played the games, and collected the cards. Almost all of my topics can originate just from the first Pokemon release.
I had to spend two hours weekend riding a bus for a while, so I bought a gameboy and 2 Pokemon games. It is still a fun game (even if the show isn't good anymore) no matter what you say.
Your post was irrelevant and just spam. There was no point to it except to make people angry and be rude. If someone likes Pokemon let them... calling them names helps no one.
You watch "anime," so I'm not really sure how far you can go calling other people names. Watching anime isn't a "cool" thing to do, so don't act like your better than other people.
Get a life and stop trying to ruin other peoples day.
Splash_King
The Scrubbiest of Hunters
Very true, pokemon aren't required to have a trainer, it's not like (most of them) they're complete idiots. I believe to bring the best of a pokemon out though, a trainer is almost necesarry. A trainer helps that pokemon grow through both battles and just in general hardships, over time the trainer and their pokemon become very close and reliable friends. My own point, is that while a trainer isn't necesarry, a trainer owned pokemon can often shine more brilliantly than it would in the wild.
Considering pokemon are virtually modeled off of animals, so can their behaviour. Just because they can heal over time, doesn't mean it's faster and more efficient than human technology. As you stated before, trainers and pokemon correlating with humans isn't necesarry, but it really does make things easier for both humans AND pokemon.
That honestly isn't true. Where there are herbivore pokemon, there are carnivors as well. A fight isn't necesarrily just friendly competition in the wild, it could be for incapacitating prey for a meal, or perhaps a territorial dispute.
To add onto the territorial thing, in one of Tyranitar's dex entries, it says it can topple even a moutain just to make it's nest. It shows Tyranitar isn't exactly very... friendly or caring with other pokemon, and probably wouldn't care for killing dozens of pokemon in the path of it's goal.
In the anime, I also vaguely remember Tyranitar being described as extremely protective over it's eggs/offspring. This ties into a territorial dispute thing, as I'm sure it wouldn't be afraid to cripple an enemy to protect it's young, like plenty of animals in real life.
Point being, a fight in the wild is almost never the thing you see with trainer battles, which can and sometimes will leave a pokemon battered, or dead. Whether it be for food, territory, or some other dispute (such as Seviper's hatred towards Zangoose, and vice versa).
I wouldn't say that's true. Considering my above explanation, fights in the wild are at more chance for death or being crippled, being whatever reason. It's true that trainer battles are much higher in number, but the risks are much less. As you said previously, they "faint", not die. That, and while this might seem blatantly obvious, pokemon gain "experience" to become stronger. They aren't fighting to keep alive like in the wild; they fight to simply become stronger. This is obviously supported by the pokemon game structure with leveling up and all that stuff. Trainer battles aren't for no reason.
That, and with the advanced healing methods the humans in the pokemon universe have, there is rarely any danger (and even then, probably not major), unless one or both of the trainers are irresponsible morons.
It's true, becoming stronger while in the protection of humans seems rather pointless, but becoming stronger isn't the only reason pokemon battle, and trainers help the battle. Battling helps the trainer and pokemon grow a strong bond, perhaps something more than a bond of friendship. Sort of like how two friends in real life just have terrible lives, but get through all the bullshit by helping eachother grow stronger, becoming greater friends all the while -- and yes, I know that sounds really farfetch'd/corny.
However, considering all the evil syndicates abusing pokemon (Team Rocket, Team Galactic, etc.), battling to grow stronger does have that strong point; growing stronger pokemon to fight off the syndicate and help prevent them from comitting more crimes.
If trainers never battled and the police never trained their pokemon, they'd be insufferably weak, and the syndicate's overtrained pokemon would just stomp them. Crime would run rampant, no? So trainer battling does have it's uses, in both growing stronger and growing closer.
Oh ofcourse, I know. A one-sided debate is a boring one, after all.
Agreed, feelings for a debate topic generally skew your debating off target and can make your responses somewhat senseless. It'd be ugly if everyone debated emotionally over everything, lol.
Yes, yes it has. That means you can get out already. ;D
Last edited:
kingslayer
The Grammar Police
- Mar 3, 2009
- 550
- 0
- Wii Online Code
- 1345-6587-5984-5125
I'm not saying a human and pokemon relationship is wrong. I'm only saying that trainers subjugating pokemon to numerous battles for no other reason than their own entertainment is pointless. A person can bond with a pokemon without battling.
Yet, animals die all the time. Would it be right to have rats fight each just so that they don't have to live in the wild? Pokemon trainers cause wild pokemon to become weaker. Wild pokemon evolve to better adapt to their surroundings. Trainers, by taking the stronger pokemon, cause the wild pokemon to lose valuable breeding potential (I know you can breed pokemon, but bred pokemon just go to trainers). This undercuts natural selection causing more deaths to occur in the wild. Over time, I believe that, without trainers, pokemon would grow stronger as a whole. They would develop new abilities (like bug pokemon going invisible or camouflage themselves) and more species would appear. I don't mean stronger as in pure strength, but stronger as a species.
As I said before, a person can take out the trainer causing the pokemon to be useless.
Example:
Team Rocket Grunt prepares to throw a pokeball.
A loud noise is heard.
Team Rocket Grunt is lying on the floor with a bullet hole in his head.
You do not need pokemon to have a proper police force, all you need is a projectile killing/stunning weapon. Pokemon aren't dangerous with a trainer, because you can always kill the trainer easily. Yes, you may say that a Steelix might be able to block the attack, but it's unlikely he'd be able to shield against an explosion. Reflect may hit back an explosion, but trust me... there will always be a way to kill the trainer.
Trainers only make pokemon darker. Pokemon should bond with humans, but in a friendlier environment. Pokemon trainers don't help out their society at all (except the economy... which can easily be arranged). I would prefer to see more pokemon firemen, gardeners, athletes, etc.
Pokemon should be free to decide what they want to do. Ash seems to me to be the only reasonable trainer due to freeing some of his pokemon and allowing Squirtle to form the Squirtle Squad.
However, this would make the game/series completely droll. It really doesn't matter, but it's fun to discuss XD. Pokemon was made for fun, so all my nick-picking is pointless. If you can enjoy the show/game, with its flaws, than go ahead. More power to you.
Yet, animals die all the time. Would it be right to have rats fight each just so that they don't have to live in the wild? Pokemon trainers cause wild pokemon to become weaker. Wild pokemon evolve to better adapt to their surroundings. Trainers, by taking the stronger pokemon, cause the wild pokemon to lose valuable breeding potential (I know you can breed pokemon, but bred pokemon just go to trainers). This undercuts natural selection causing more deaths to occur in the wild. Over time, I believe that, without trainers, pokemon would grow stronger as a whole. They would develop new abilities (like bug pokemon going invisible or camouflage themselves) and more species would appear. I don't mean stronger as in pure strength, but stronger as a species.
As I said before, a person can take out the trainer causing the pokemon to be useless.
Example:
Team Rocket Grunt prepares to throw a pokeball.
A loud noise is heard.
Team Rocket Grunt is lying on the floor with a bullet hole in his head.
You do not need pokemon to have a proper police force, all you need is a projectile killing/stunning weapon. Pokemon aren't dangerous with a trainer, because you can always kill the trainer easily. Yes, you may say that a Steelix might be able to block the attack, but it's unlikely he'd be able to shield against an explosion. Reflect may hit back an explosion, but trust me... there will always be a way to kill the trainer.
Trainers only make pokemon darker. Pokemon should bond with humans, but in a friendlier environment. Pokemon trainers don't help out their society at all (except the economy... which can easily be arranged). I would prefer to see more pokemon firemen, gardeners, athletes, etc.
Pokemon should be free to decide what they want to do. Ash seems to me to be the only reasonable trainer due to freeing some of his pokemon and allowing Squirtle to form the Squirtle Squad.
However, this would make the game/series completely droll. It really doesn't matter, but it's fun to discuss XD. Pokemon was made for fun, so all my nick-picking is pointless. If you can enjoy the show/game, with its flaws, than go ahead. More power to you
.
Lastwords?
Mk God, Ssbb champ
Wow,
uhh guyz as much as I love pokemon... Its not real. So yeah it might have some flaws, but if it didnt it wouldnt be intreasting, correct?
A perfected [anything/matter] Is a waste [of anythinf/matter] for it has no room to grow.
uhh guyz as much as I love pokemon... Its not real. So yeah it might have some flaws, but if it didnt it wouldnt be intreasting, correct?
A perfected [anything/matter] Is a waste [of anythinf/matter] for it has no room to grow.
You say that and yet look at the rest of your post
Its the internet
Enjoy it
You posting in the anime section
I watch it due to the total lack of decent TV on the TV
But I have stated that before
What another life?
Where do I get another life as there are some things I want to try that might end up in death?
Wasn't this thread about the so called anime version?
Now you guys come in and turn it into one about the games
