Page 19 of 152

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:03 pm
by Serza5
Same here. :boon:

Jim Carrey pokemon? This is me trying to keep on topic.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:06 pm
by El Dango
Is that Jim Carrey in... a horror movie?

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:08 am
by Holy Crap
Holy Crap wrote:
Serza5 wrote:Yeah it looks different but isn't there a lot of dark types already?
23.
By the way, I didn't get time before, but for comparison, there are:
53 Psychics
33 Fires
80 Normals
25 Fightings
65 Flyings
50 Poisons
48 Grounds
37 Rocks
47 Bugs
18 Ghosts
26 Steels
19 Dragons
22 Ices
28 Electrics
55 Grasses
92 Waters

So no I think Dark does indeed need a boost to numbers, currently having the 4th leaset (and Ghost and Dragon SHOULD be rare anyway).

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:28 am
by Haruka
I think that numbers are good but yes, Dark types could be raised up.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:16 pm
by Serza5
*Note to self : I must research into this stuff before making a statement*

A ghost dragon? That would be quite interesting. :)

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:35 pm
by Holy Crap
Serza5 wrote: A ghost dragon? That would be quite interesting. :)
O rly?
*Note to self : I must research into this stuff before making a statement*
:P

Bulbapedia is amazing. :mryellow:

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:52 pm
by Serza5
A new one I meant. :P Ok thats not what I meant, I find it hard to remember every single pokemon there is, especially when i'm in school "revising" physics.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 12:53 pm
by Holy Crap
Haha I understand, I personally have a near encyclopaedic knowledge of Pokemon but not everyone else does.

Giratina is pretty memorable though...

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:10 pm
by Serza5
I know all of the 1st gen and most of the second gen. Other than that i'm pretty forgetful.

Yeah but it has an unusual type so it's easy to forget.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 11:57 pm
by Rsandee
I always wanted a dark and flying type bird.
Like Staraptor but with the possibility to do dark moves like dark void.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:48 am
by Haruka
I would like that more Psychic+Dark types were created, or more Psychic+Fight types.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:05 am
by Serza5
I think a fire water type would be nice. :mryellow:

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:50 am
by Holy Crap
Haruka wrote:more Psychic+Fight types.
We already have three. I'd personallyh prefe some brand new type combinations, like Bug/Electric and Fire/Dragon.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:37 pm
by Haruka
Or Dragon and Ice would be great. :hinhinhin:

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:38 pm
by spiraldoor
How about an alternate Dragonair evolution that doesn't suck, and actually looks like it's from the same evolutionary line as Dratini and Dragonair?

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 9:00 pm
by Serza5
Yeah. it could be a water dragon. :mryellow:

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:48 am
by Holy Crap
spiraldoor wrote:How about an alternate Dragonair evolution that doesn't suck, and actually looks like it's from the same evolutionary line as Dratini and Dragonair?
Dragonite doesn't suck, it's actually quite poweful.
As for the second point, it's face is actually very similar to that of Dragonairs. Truly, I see no point to your suggestion.
Serza5 wrote:Yeah. it could be a water dragon. :mryellow:
We have enough of those... yes, two is enough.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2010 4:26 pm
by spiraldoor
Holy Crap wrote:
spiraldoor wrote:How about an alternate Dragonair evolution that doesn't suck, and actually looks like it's from the same evolutionary line as Dratini and Dragonair?
Dragonite doesn't suck, it's actually quite poweful.
As for the second point, it's face is actually very similar to that of Dragonairs. Truly, I see no point to your suggestion.
When I said that it sucked, I wasn't referring to its strength in battle. I was referring to its stupid character design. And its face may be similar to Dragonair's, but what about the rest of it?

ImageImageImage
Dratini looks a little too small and cute, but that's fine because it's a first-stage Pokémon. Dragonair looks like a bigger, better, more elegant and more badass version of Dratini, which is pretty cool. Dragonite breaks this cycle by throwing out everything that made the Dragonair cool and replacing it with generic cartoon dragon-ness.

I suggest an alternative to Dragonite; one which looks like the bigger, stronger, more vicious/elegant/badass version of Dragonair that Dragonite should have been in the first place.
Holy Crap wrote:
Serza5 wrote:Yeah. it could be a water dragon. :mryellow:
We have enough of those... yes, two is enough.
I'd have to agree. Water/Dragon is a rather uninspired combination, and so is Dragonite's Dragon/Flying. I'd rather an elternate Dragonair evolution remain a pure Dragon-type, just like its pre-evolutions.

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 6:59 am
by Holy Crap
Hm, in that case I simply disagree, I think Dragonite is actually pretty cool. Salamence on the other hand...

Re: General Pokémon Thread

Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:38 pm
by Serza5
What are the water dragons? I seem to have forgotten and is currently to lazy to look it up.

I don't mind Salamence but Dragonite is defiantly better.